[Grammar] She can always give freely of her time to others.

[vpkannan]

Hi,

1) She can always give freely her time to others.
2) She can always give her time freely to others.
3) She can always given freely of her time to others.

Are they correct? Kindly explain the relevance and meaning of 'of' in the third sentence.

Thanks.

 

[GoesStation]

Re: is 'of' required?

When a verb follows a modal, it has to be a bare infinitive. Therefore, number 3 doesn't work. Number 1 is unnatural, but number 2 is OK.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: is 'of' required?

I wonder if "given" in #3 was a typo.

 

[GoesStation]

Re: is 'of' required?

I wonder if "given" in #3 was a typo.

Good point. Number 3 would be correct if the verb were give. Including of emphasizes the value of the gift a little.

 

[tedmc]

Re: is 'of' required?

She is always readily available to help others.

 

[tedmc]

Re: is 'of' required?

That's fine, ted, but it's not what the OP asked about, and it doesn't mean exactly the same as the OP's sentences.

I would interpret "giving one's time to others" as an indirect way of saying "helping others". What else can it mean?

 

[vpkannan]

Re: is 'of' required?

'3) She can always give freely of her time to others.' - the "given" is definitely a typo for "give" as pointed out. Sorry about it.

My point is whether it doesn't convey the same meaning without 'of'. If it adds some more meaning, what is it or what is not without it?. Kindly clarify it grammatically also.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: is 'of' required?

If you keep the word order but omit "of", you get a grammatically incorrect sentence. We wouldn't say:

She can always give freely her time to others.

Mind you, I find starting with "She can" unnatural in this context anyway. It seems more likely to me that we would talk about a habitual action someone already has in this context. "She gives her time freely for others".

 

[Rover_KE]

Re: is 'of' required?

I would interpret "giving one's time to others" as an indirect way of saying "helping others". What else can it mean?

You can help others without giving up any of your time.

 

[vpkannan]

Re: is 'of' required?

The original sentence is 'She has always given freely of her time' from Oxford Dictionary. As an ESL learner, I am confused between the following possible meanings:

1. She has always given her time to others freely.
2. She has always given (something) mindless of her own time.

Or else, does it convey something else?

 

[GoesStation]

Re: is 'of' required?

The original sentence is 'She has always given freely of her time' from Oxford Dictionary. As an ESL learner, I am confused between the following possible meanings:

1. She has always given her time to others freely.
2. She has always given (something) regardless [STRIKE]mindless[/STRIKE] of her own time.

Or else, does it convey something else?

Number 1 is the correct meaning. To give freely of her time​ is a formal way to say it.