{To verb 1 + verb 2} or {to verb 1 + **to** verb 2}?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
How to have two "to + verbs"? Is it to verb 1 + verb 2 or to verb 1 + to verb 2?
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and to increase the accuracy of report.
Thanks!
verbs infinitives
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
How to have two "to + verbs"? Is it to verb 1 + verb 2 or to verb 1 + to verb 2?
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and to increase the accuracy of report.
Thanks!
verbs infinitives
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
This doesn't happen to be from a résumé, does it? I ask, because bullet points in résumés tend to be in past tense, in which case the first verb would be led.
– Brian Hitchcock
Jul 19 '15 at 19:16
Version 1 is ambiguous. The conjunction "and" could be joining "integrate" with "increase" (as you intended), or it could be joining "lead" to "increase". That is, the two activities could be (1) Lead a team to integrate two systems and (2) increase the accuracy of report.
– Andreas Blass
Jul 20 '15 at 2:24
Neither is correct in English. Could you find a better translator?
– Robbie Goodwin
1 hour ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
How to have two "to + verbs"? Is it to verb 1 + verb 2 or to verb 1 + to verb 2?
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and to increase the accuracy of report.
Thanks!
verbs infinitives
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
How to have two "to + verbs"? Is it to verb 1 + verb 2 or to verb 1 + to verb 2?
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
- Lead a team to integrate two systems and to increase the accuracy of report.
Thanks!
verbs infinitives
verbs infinitives
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
edited Jul 19 '15 at 19:20
Brian Hitchcock
12.6k11636
12.6k11636
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
asked Jul 19 '15 at 18:29
user129820
1112
1112
This doesn't happen to be from a résumé, does it? I ask, because bullet points in résumés tend to be in past tense, in which case the first verb would be led.
– Brian Hitchcock
Jul 19 '15 at 19:16
Version 1 is ambiguous. The conjunction "and" could be joining "integrate" with "increase" (as you intended), or it could be joining "lead" to "increase". That is, the two activities could be (1) Lead a team to integrate two systems and (2) increase the accuracy of report.
– Andreas Blass
Jul 20 '15 at 2:24
Neither is correct in English. Could you find a better translator?
– Robbie Goodwin
1 hour ago
add a comment |
This doesn't happen to be from a résumé, does it? I ask, because bullet points in résumés tend to be in past tense, in which case the first verb would be led.
– Brian Hitchcock
Jul 19 '15 at 19:16
Version 1 is ambiguous. The conjunction "and" could be joining "integrate" with "increase" (as you intended), or it could be joining "lead" to "increase". That is, the two activities could be (1) Lead a team to integrate two systems and (2) increase the accuracy of report.
– Andreas Blass
Jul 20 '15 at 2:24
Neither is correct in English. Could you find a better translator?
– Robbie Goodwin
1 hour ago
This doesn't happen to be from a résumé, does it? I ask, because bullet points in résumés tend to be in past tense, in which case the first verb would be led.
– Brian Hitchcock
Jul 19 '15 at 19:16
This doesn't happen to be from a résumé, does it? I ask, because bullet points in résumés tend to be in past tense, in which case the first verb would be led.
– Brian Hitchcock
Jul 19 '15 at 19:16
Version 1 is ambiguous. The conjunction "and" could be joining "integrate" with "increase" (as you intended), or it could be joining "lead" to "increase". That is, the two activities could be (1) Lead a team to integrate two systems and (2) increase the accuracy of report.
– Andreas Blass
Jul 20 '15 at 2:24
Version 1 is ambiguous. The conjunction "and" could be joining "integrate" with "increase" (as you intended), or it could be joining "lead" to "increase". That is, the two activities could be (1) Lead a team to integrate two systems and (2) increase the accuracy of report.
– Andreas Blass
Jul 20 '15 at 2:24
Neither is correct in English. Could you find a better translator?
– Robbie Goodwin
1 hour ago
Neither is correct in English. Could you find a better translator?
– Robbie Goodwin
1 hour ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
1.Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
Version 1. is the better option.
Version 2. is acceptable but not recommended.
Note that adding extra words and clauses can make a difference, so:
Lead a team to integrate two systems and also to increase the accuracy of report.
This is because the addition of extra words can change the emphasis and stress pattern of a sentence and, if a long passage is added, it might be necessary to remind the reader that the latest verb is still an infinitive.
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
1
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In sentence 1, the two actions appear clubbed together in a single unit.
Sentence 2 seems to distinguish between them as two distinct actions.
Use whichever leads to more clarity.
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
1.Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
Version 1. is the better option.
Version 2. is acceptable but not recommended.
Note that adding extra words and clauses can make a difference, so:
Lead a team to integrate two systems and also to increase the accuracy of report.
This is because the addition of extra words can change the emphasis and stress pattern of a sentence and, if a long passage is added, it might be necessary to remind the reader that the latest verb is still an infinitive.
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
1
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
1.Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
Version 1. is the better option.
Version 2. is acceptable but not recommended.
Note that adding extra words and clauses can make a difference, so:
Lead a team to integrate two systems and also to increase the accuracy of report.
This is because the addition of extra words can change the emphasis and stress pattern of a sentence and, if a long passage is added, it might be necessary to remind the reader that the latest verb is still an infinitive.
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
1
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
1.Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
Version 1. is the better option.
Version 2. is acceptable but not recommended.
Note that adding extra words and clauses can make a difference, so:
Lead a team to integrate two systems and also to increase the accuracy of report.
This is because the addition of extra words can change the emphasis and stress pattern of a sentence and, if a long passage is added, it might be necessary to remind the reader that the latest verb is still an infinitive.
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
1.Lead a team to integrate two systems and increase the accuracy of report.
Version 1. is the better option.
Version 2. is acceptable but not recommended.
Note that adding extra words and clauses can make a difference, so:
Lead a team to integrate two systems and also to increase the accuracy of report.
This is because the addition of extra words can change the emphasis and stress pattern of a sentence and, if a long passage is added, it might be necessary to remind the reader that the latest verb is still an infinitive.
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
edited Jul 19 '15 at 18:47
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
answered Jul 19 '15 at 18:36
chasly from UK
22.6k13068
22.6k13068
1
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
add a comment |
1
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
1
1
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
You're right about the importance of the stress pattern for the real-time parser, but keeping separate complementizer to isn't merely "acceptable"; it's perfectly normal. Who knows, after all, what degree of separation from it will cause a listener to forget the main verb? For precision, deletions are discouraged -- especially in writing -- because every deletion leaves out information that would rule out many unintended ambiguous readings.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 18:49
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler - I don't disagree with your comments. My dismissal of version 2 wasn't intended to imply a general rule. I was responding specifically to that single case with a rider to be wary.
– chasly from UK
Jul 19 '15 at 19:23
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
@JohnLawler What's the grammatical relationship of the two infinitives with "Lead a team..."?
– Zan700
Jul 19 '15 at 21:01
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
These are both purpose infinitives, which means you can insert in order before to without changing meaning. Since they're both purpose infinitives, it makes sense to drop the second to if the first clause is short; if it's long, though, a reminder might be in order.
– John Lawler
Jul 19 '15 at 22:08
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In sentence 1, the two actions appear clubbed together in a single unit.
Sentence 2 seems to distinguish between them as two distinct actions.
Use whichever leads to more clarity.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In sentence 1, the two actions appear clubbed together in a single unit.
Sentence 2 seems to distinguish between them as two distinct actions.
Use whichever leads to more clarity.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
In sentence 1, the two actions appear clubbed together in a single unit.
Sentence 2 seems to distinguish between them as two distinct actions.
Use whichever leads to more clarity.
In sentence 1, the two actions appear clubbed together in a single unit.
Sentence 2 seems to distinguish between them as two distinct actions.
Use whichever leads to more clarity.
answered Jul 19 '15 at 20:08
user129823
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f260830%2fto-verb-1-verb-2-or-to-verb-1-to-verb-2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
This doesn't happen to be from a résumé, does it? I ask, because bullet points in résumés tend to be in past tense, in which case the first verb would be led.
– Brian Hitchcock
Jul 19 '15 at 19:16
Version 1 is ambiguous. The conjunction "and" could be joining "integrate" with "increase" (as you intended), or it could be joining "lead" to "increase". That is, the two activities could be (1) Lead a team to integrate two systems and (2) increase the accuracy of report.
– Andreas Blass
Jul 20 '15 at 2:24
Neither is correct in English. Could you find a better translator?
– Robbie Goodwin
1 hour ago