When Can "To" In A Verb Be Omitted?

ForumsGrammar & Sentence Structure
  •  1
+0

Hello,

I have a question: why can the "to" of the verb in the first sentence be omitted but not in the second sentence? When can it be and not be omitted?


1) All I have to do is (to) leave. --> Here both versions (with and without "to") of the sentence are sound and correct.

2) I have no choice but to leave. --> But here "to" cannot be omitted.


Is there a way to know when it is necessary and when not?


Thank you very much.

Regards.

+0
Eren8hisfatherAll I have to do is (to) leave.

When echoing a form of do, 'to' is optional.

This is typical in this kind of equative sentence (X = Y), in other words, a sentence with a linking verb, typically 'is', 'was', 'are', or 'were'.

Eren8hisfatherI have no choice but to leave.

There is no echo of do here, so 'to' is required.

CJ

Comments  

Presumably you read about this topic in an article somewhere, perhaps in a book or on the 'Net.


Did the article not explain about to infinitivals, and when 'bare' infinitivals are permitted?

Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
 CalifJim's reply was promoted to an answer.
CalifJim
Eren8hisfatherAll I have to do is (to) leave.

When echoing a form of do, 'to' is optional.

This is typical in this kind of equative sentence (X = Y), in other words, a sentence with a linking verb, typically 'is', 'was', 'are', or 'were'.

CJ

Yes: more precisely where the subject NP contains "do" in a relative clause, as in the OP's example.

Answer this Question

Guides