+0
Hi Teachers

Is it possible for modal verbs (shall,should, will, would, may, might) to be followed by "to" ?

E.g: Mr. Bahnken also said the death penalty should to be pursued for those found guilty of killing his brother

A portion of the proceeds from the sale of its paper and timber assets would to be used to return equity to shareholders

Shouldn't it be ( should be, would be), is it even common for native speaker? If yes what is the difference between "be" alone and "to be" in this context

And in the case of "have, has,is" Is this even correct? " you don't have be intimidated by the two-gigabyte jargon" "What WOW has done better than other games is be able to appeal to both audience"

Shouldn't it be "have to be" and "is to be" or"being"? what is the difference?

Thanks a lot
+0
.
Is it possible for modal verbs (shall,should, will, would, may, might) to be followed by "to"? -- No. They all take bare infinitives (no 'to')

Shouldn't it be "have to be" and "is to be" -- Yes. Those are your only choices.
+0
These are misprints that were not caught by the editors.
Here's how is can happen. The writer reports
Mr. Smith says the matter has to be pursued in the courts.

Then he changes his mind. He decides to say should be instead of has to be, so he substitutes should for has, and forgets to delete the to. Then he ends up with the ungrammatical should to be. It's purely a mistake of editing.
CJ
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Comments  
Thanks MM, I asked this because I found it on nytimes.com
 CalifJim's reply was promoted to an answer.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.