[Grammar] No place to go ...

[inase]

Of the following sentences, which are not acceptable? My guess is Sentences 4, 5 and 7 are not. I also wonder if Sentences 11 and 12 mean the same.

1. I have no place to go.
2. I have no place to go to.
3. I have nowhere to go.
4. I have nowhere to go to.
5. I have no pen to write.
6. I have no pen to write with.
7. I have no paper to write.
8. I have no paper to write in.
9. I have no friend to write.
10. I have no friend to write to.
11. I have no doctor to see.
12. I have no doctor to see me.
13. I have no expert to consult.
14. I have no expert to consult with.

Inase

 

[Phaedrus]

I find all but (12) acceptable, and that sentence I find only questionable. If it's acceptable, it has a different meaning from (11). Sentence (11) means "I have no doctor whom I can see," and (12) means "I have no doctor who will see me."

Sentence (8) is strange. Paper is written on, not in. But (8) makes sense if we think of "paper" as meaning "newspaper." We can write in newspapers. Sentence (7) means something entirely different. In (7), "paper" means "school paper" or the like. You don't have to write a paper.

 

[probus]

To me, both 8 and 9 are unacceptable.

I would say "no paper to write on", and I would never use 9 at all.

 

[GoesStation]

Of the following sentences, which are not acceptable? My guess is Sentences 4, 5 and 7 are not. I also wonder if Sentences 11 and 12 mean the same.

1. I have no place to go.:tick:
2. I have no place to go to.:tick:
3. I have nowhere to go.:tick:
4. I have nowhere to go to.:tick:
5. I have no pen to write.:cross:
6. I have no pen to write with.:tick:
7. I have no paper to write.:cross:(could be possible in a specific, rare case)

8. I have no paper to write in.:cross:
9. I have no friend to write.:cross:
10. I have no friend to write to.:tick:
11. I have no doctor to see.:cross:
12. I have no doctor to see me.:tick:
13. I have no expert to consult.:tick:(odd but not impossible)

14. I have no expert to consult with.:tick:

See above.

 

[Phaedrus]

Somehow I missed (5) -- *"I have no pen to write" -- which is totally unacceptable. All the others, with the possible exception of (12), seem perfectly fine to me.

 

[inase]

What about the following? Are they acceptable?

9'. I have no friend to write a letter. (SVOO)
10'. I have no friend to write a letter to. (SVO)

 

[inase]

I find all but (12) acceptable, and that sentence I find only questionable. If it's acceptable, it has a different meaning from (11). Sentence (11) means "I have no doctor whom I can see," and (12) means "I have no doctor who will see me."

Sentence (8) is strange. Paper is written on, not in. But (8) makes sense if we think of "paper" as meaning "newspaper." We can write in newspapers. Sentence (7) means something entirely different. In (7), "paper" means "school paper" or the like. You don't have to write a paper.

In general, do both "I saw the doctor" and "The doctor saw me" mean "I had a medical checkup", "I had myself examined by the doctor", or "I had the doctor examine me?"

 

[Rover_KE]

What about the following? Are they acceptable?

9'. I have no friend to write a letter. (SVOO):cross:
10'. I have no friend to write a letter to.:tick: (SVO)

In general, do both "I saw the doctor" and "The doctor saw me" mean "I had a medical checkup", "I had myself examined by the doctor", or "I had the doctor examine me?"

Not necessarily. You might have seen him in the street or to get your passport application countersigned.

 

[emsr2d2]

However, if someone is ill, a friend might say "I think you should see a doctor". In that context, we would all know what it meant. The friend wouldn't say "I think it would be a good idea if you made an appointment with a physician for a medical checkup".