Why omit 'to' ? & 'person' or 'people'

   Share on Facebook  
Jisu98  #222897  Sat, 06 May 06 04:42 AM

Thank you in advance.

I've seen some sentences omitting 'to' when a verb used as a complement. For example, 'The saftest thing to do is stop and stand like a statue.'  Is it a mistake, a colloquial ussage or an acceptible formal one?

And,  I will post again about 'people' or 'person'.  In fact, I posted the following question a few minutes ago but it's not on the list. If it is, sorry.

I took an exam and I saw a sentence 'According to the above story, Ida Lewis had saved at least 3 persons in trouble in the ocean.'

When I studied at a language school, teachers (at least 3 different teachers) emphasized that I have to use '1 person' or ' 2 people', '3 people' and so on. But, the above was in my midterm and I looked up a dictionay. According to it,  '3 persons' are right. What's going on? Why my two Canadian teachers and an American teacher told me not to use '3 persons'? They told me to say '3 people.  Is there any reason?

  
Top 500 Contributor
Joined on Tue, Dec 6 2005
Korea
Full Member (183)
This is a live chat room, hosted on the chat page. You can also click here to see the chat in fullscreen.
Mister Micawber  #223057  Sat, 06 May 06 03:27 PM


1-- Yes, the to can be omitted and, if the sentence is clearer thereby, is considered better style.

2-- Persons is a legitimate plural for person, but it usually appears in semi-official language or in an effort to give a specific head count; a newspaper report of a disaster would qualify, I think.

  
Top 10 Contributor
Joined on Wed, Aug 4 2004
Yokohama
Veteran Member (22,347)
SystemAdministratorTeachers
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.'
AddThis Feed Button RSS Feed: ESL Basic English Grammar Questions and Help
© 2008 MediaCET Ltd.
Terms and Conditions & Terms of Service