Maverick wrote:
What's the difference? (if possible)
1. I am used to working alone
2. I am used to work alone |
|
In addition (and sorry for the tag),
There are three variations:
A. "be used to" is a set phrase, and
the preposition "to" takes a nominal as its object. If the object is an event, -ing is added, and if the object is a non-event (a thing), then -ing is not added:
I am used to
working. (gerund)
I am used to
the job. (noun)
B. "be used" is also a set phrase, and to that structure we can add the prepositions "to" and "for" to express an adverb of purpose:
The knife is used
for. . . .
The knife is used
to. . . .
C. "used to" is also a set phrase, but the word "to" is not a preposition. It's an infinitive marker. It's object is a base verb:
I used to
work. (base verb)
I used to
working. (continuous verb; ungrammatical)
I used to
the job. (noun; ungrammatical)
In short, the variations are as follows:
be used to (habit) + nominal
be used (instrument) + to or for
used to (but no longer) + base verb
As for your original sentence, specifically the ungrammaticality of 2. (please see below), "to work" is an infinitive verb, and if you'll notice above "used to" + base verb doesn't take "be", so in order to correct 2. we have to delete "am":
1. I am used to working alone. (be used to + nominal)
2. *I
am used to work alone. => I used to work alone. (used to + base verb)