# EN: help + to-infinitive / bare infinitive / (in) V-ing



## joseph_D

I have always thought one should say "to help to do sth" but I have came across two sentences that trouble me:
"they have helped us decide for the best solution"
"isotopes have helped scientists gain insight into..."
are they really correct? is there a rule to know when "to" should be avoided"
thanks a lot!

*Moderator note: *multiple threads merged to create this one.


----------



## Tim~!

You have the choice.

Help is a verb which accepts a bare infinitive (no 'to') just as readily as the more regular structure.

You can say either form: "I helped him do his homework" is just as correct as "I helped him to do his homework."


----------



## Dzienne

For these sentences, for the one with the verb, I agree with Tim.  "To" is optional for that:  "They have helped us decide for the best solution"  (Except I would say "They helped us decide ON the best solution." but that could start another thread!)

For the other sentence, we are talking about a noun following "help".   "Isotopes have helped scientists gain insight into...".  "Scientists" is a direct object noun.  No "to" is needed.  A "to" would be needed in front of a noun if it were acting as a preposition like "I am going to the store".


----------



## Angle O'Phial

It seems to me that the _to_ is optional, whether or not there is a direct object (and subject of the secondary verb).

The following are all correct:
_a) They helped decide the question.
b) They helped to decide the question.
c) They helped me decide the question
d) They helped me to decide the question.
e) They helped those people decide the question.
f) They helped those people to decide the question._

However, I think my natural tendency is to omit the _to_ when the secondary verb is close to _help_ and include it as they get farther away; I have a slight preference for a over b and for f over e.


----------



## jann

Maybe you'll find this page interesting.


----------



## Dzienne

COOL article!  Sometimes it's hard to explain why something is a certain way, it's just how you learn it.  I didn't even know there was a name for an infinitive without a "to".  It still doesn't explain exactly why the "to" is dropped sometimes, but it does give a decent explanation of when, which is half the battle.  Thanks!


----------



## jann

Glad you like it. 

Maybe we could hypothesize that the reason you drop the "to" when you have a modal is because of its auxiliary nature.  Think about another familiar auxiliary: to do.

We say "I do go" and not "I do to go." 

When you use an auxiliary, it is to some degree as if the auxiliary becomes part of the verb itself.  It's as if you've created a new two-part verb.  It has its own (new) meaning, and it acts as a single unit.  "I must" doesn't tell us the action, it's as if we're missing the verb... but "I must go" is very different in meaning from "I go."

Interestingly enough, it seems to me that we never use the to-infinitive for these modal auxiliaries: "to shall" (for "should"), "to must," "to would," "to can," etc... they just don't exist!!  When we need an infinitive structure, we use an adjective instead:  "to be supposed to," "to be willing to," "to be able to".  

"To help" strikes me as very unique.... it is as if it were semi-modal, making the "to" optional. I can't think of any other verbs like it.  

As an off-topic side note, I am not not convinced that the "all I did is (to)" structure mentioned on the BBC page is the same grammatical animal.


----------



## Dzienne

jann said:


> Interestingly enough, it seems to me that we never use the to-infinitive for these modal auxiliaries: "to should", "to must", "to would", "to can", etc... they just don't exist!!  When we need an infinitive structure, we use an adjective instead:  "to be supposed to," "to be willing to," "to be able to".



Oh, I would quote half of what you said, but there's forum rules and I'm talking to a mod! 

Anyway, the "do" always has been a little confusing for me, as another one of those things we do but I have no idea why, because it's not really necessary in the Latin languages, which English is partially based on, particularly the French.  I wonder if this is from the Germanic roots?  I know, this is the English and French forum, but as a point of reference for English, which has a third of its roots in Old Norse, Old English, and Dutch, it would be interesting.  You don't see in French for instance "Je fais l'aime bien" for "I do like it."  We kind of put it there for emphasis in English.

You did forget one auxiliary (if you want to call it that, not sure what else it would be) "to go", used in the immediate future tense.  What's strange is that we DO (haha ) use the infinitive after it, complete with "to".  "I'm going to write a sentence."  "Going" is followed by "to write", for instance.

The "all I did is (to)" structure is different I think.  The "to" seems to be more often dropped in American English rather than the British for that.  Like you drop an open can of paint off a ladder and exclaim, "All I did was set it on the ledge so I could climb up!"  The "to be" is stuck between the "to do" and the main verb.  You're right.


----------



## jann

Very interesting discussion!   Thanks, Thomas, for adding "to dare" as a 2nd verb which may be followed by either the to-infinitive or the bare infinitive.  However, I do not think we can say "to ought" any more than we can say "to must."  It is not grammatical.



			
				Dzienne said:
			
		

> You did forget one auxiliary [...] "to go", used in the immediate future tense. What's strange is that we DO use the infinitive after it, complete with "to". "I'm going to write a sentence." "Going" is followed by "to write", for instance.


Now the waters are getting muddy! The verb "go" indicating the immediate future (_futur proche_) cannot be used in the simple present.  Consider: if we say "He goes to study" it means that he physically prepares himself to study (by moving to his desk, getting out his books, etc.).  This particular "goes" is not an auxiliary at all.  It's a main verb, and the to-infinitive is of course mandatory afterwards.  In order to obtain _futur proche_ meaning and auxiliary function, we must use the progressive: "to be going + to-infinitive".  It feels a lot like the adjective structure "to be supposed/willing/able + to-infinitive" except that we have a present participle replacing the past participle!

"To go" may be an auxiliary, but it is not a modal any more than "to do" is.  Certainly there are other (non-modal) auxiliaries - "to be" and "to have" come to mind immediately.  I did find a couple more articles on the subject: modality and modal auxiliaries.  So perhaps in the end we should just come back to saying that modal auxiliaries behave differently from other English verbs for the simple reason that they are modal auxiliaries.  

I've been enjoying this thread as a member, but now putting my moderator hat back on I realize we've strayed a bit off-topic from the original question about "to help (to)."  If people have more thoughts on the subject, I will try to split this "modal auxiliary" discussion off into a separate thread so that we can pursue it in more depth.


----------



## Lacuzon

Bonsoir,

I have a doubt about ABBA :
Won't somebody help me chase these shadows

Should not it be 
Won't somebody help me *to* chase these shadows away
or
Won't somebody help me *chasing* these shadows away
?

Thank's in advance


----------



## geostan

The _to_ is optional after the verb_ help_. I assume the _to_ was omitted for the sake of the rhythm. The second suggestion is incorrect.


----------



## kenz260

Hi, 
I'm not sure what sentence is correct in the following: 
A model may help in detecting bugs 
or 
A model may help detecting bugs

Thanks.


----------



## bloomiegirl

I would probably say: A model may help to detect bugs.
But it's possible that the others may be appropriate, in some circumstances, depending on the context.


----------



## geostan

I would not use the second version. The first one is okay. It is the same as saying_ A model may help in the detection of bugs._ But Bloomiegirl's suggestion is simpler.


----------



## jann

And you can even say "... may help detect bugs" without the "to." 

Kenz260, what would you have said in French?


----------



## so_quoi

Hi ! 
I saw that this question wasn't new, but I can't decide what is the best form for my situation. 
I would like to answer to an american with a "perfect" english (very official mail)
I'm not sure that the form is the good one... 
"We want to thank you and the reviewers for the very  valuable comments that will _help us improving_ the manuscript."

Thanks for your comments and opinions ! 
so


----------



## Gutenberg

that will help us improve the manuscript
that will help us in improving the manuscript


----------



## jann

Welcome, So_quoi. 

Actually, I would say that neither of those forms is the best solution.  It would be more natural to use an infinitive after the semi-modal auxiliary "to help."

_... that will help us *to improve* the manuscript._


----------



## Keith Bradford

Peut-être cette tentation d'utiliser _-ing _suite à _help_, provient-elle d'une toute autre expression : "I can't help doing..." = je ne peux pas m'empêcher de faire...  Ne pas confondre les deux.

Can't you *help smoking *cigarettes? = Tu ne peux pas t'empêcher de fumer les cigarettes ?
Can you *help (to) smoke *herrings? = Peux-tu nous aider à fumer les harengs ?


----------



## Shanon7

Bonjour, je voulais savoir quelles sont les règles avec le verbe "help" en ce qui concerne le "ing" ? Quand doit-on mettre le -ing et quand doit-on laisser au present simple? 
Ex : to help build a country
J'aurais tendance à dire to help building a country, mais je sais que c est faux. Quand a t-on le droit de mettre -ing alors? Et y a-t-il d'autres verbes qui obéissent aux mêmes règles?
Merci!


----------



## djweaverbeaver

Salut,

On ne peut dire que *to help [someone] (to) do something*, donc un bare infinitive ou un to-infinitive.  Le gérondif n'est pas possible.  Par exemple, on dirait *Charitable organizations are helping [the government] (to) rebuild the country.
*
En revanche, on utilise la forme + ing dans l'expression *can't help + verb-ing*:  *I can't help loving you so much*. ( *= Je ne peux m'êmpecher de tant t'aimer*)


----------

