# doesn't do anything else but [to] despise herself (omit "to" + infinitive)



## Milton Sand

A gentle forum member corrected me a suggested:



> Also, you would say "She doesn't do anything else but *to* despise herself." Drop the "to".


 
 In which cases should I dispense with that "to"?

Thanks in advance and regards!


----------



## BMizzle

You can never drop the "to" from an infinitive. This case is not an infinitive. The verb is conjugated and subject of despise is "she".


----------



## Barbara S.

I'm not sure. Since the form is "despise" the verb must either be present subjunctive or infinitive. You cannot say "she despise". No hace más que despreciarse. So yes, sometimes the infinitive is expressed without a "to". Of course, when you link three infinitives you usually only use "to" once. "I like to hunt, fish, and scuba dive."


----------



## Outsider

BMizzle said:


> You can never drop the "to" from an infinitive.


Yes, you can. 



BMizzle said:


> This case is not an infinitive.


Yes, it is. It's called the bare infinitive. 



BMizzle said:


> The verb is conjugated and subject of despise is "she".


The subject of "despise" is indeed "she", but the verb is not conjugated.


----------



## Milton Sand

Thank you all!
Barbara, it's good to know that tip of using just one "to".

Outsider has mentoned the "bare infinitive", that's new to me.

I'm going to check out more about it; if I can't find a good explanation, I'll be back.

Thanks again!


----------



## cubaMania

It is indeed the bare infinitive.
The reason for the use of the bare infinitive here is the auxiliary verb "do".
She despises herself.  Without "do" the verb "despise" is conjugated.
She does (not) despise herself.  Here the verb "do" is conjugated and "despise" is the bare infinitive.
She despised herself.
She did (not) despise herself.


> *Auxiliaries* are verbs which are combined with other verbs to form various tenses. It should be noted that when an auxiliary is combined with another verb, it is the auxiliary which must agree with the subject, while the form of the other verb remains invariable.
> 
> When the auxiliary *do* is combined with another verb, the other verb always has the form of the bare infinitive.


----------



## Milton Sand

Hi!
I'm sorry, I think I haven't understood it yet. Let's blame my biorhythm of today.

Well, let me analize (_I just used a bare infinitive!) _my example:
I think I had two sentences: She does not do anything else and She despises herself or She does despise herself.

She _does_ -> Conjugation of auxiliar 
not -> negation adverb
do -> first sentence's main verb in bare infinitive
anything else ->direct object of "do" // End of first sentence.
but -> conjunction that joins both sentences while cancels the effect of "not".
*to* despise herself ->second sentence, with a main verb in infinitive and a reflexive pronoun, sharing the subject with the first sentence.

*Question:* 
Is it that neither of the main verbs ("do" or "despise") need to be preceded by "to" due to the presence of the conjugated auxiliar "does"?

Have I understood it? Thanks fot your patient!


----------



## Barbara S.

Yes. The auxiliary or modal verb "does" takes the infinitive without the "to". What's confusing in English is that the present subjunctive - in the few cases where it is still commonly used - is the same form as the infinitive. i.e. "The doctor recommends that he eat more vegetables." "He suggests that the plants be kept in the house." 

"I hope you are happy." I hope you will be happy." the be is in the infinitive because it pertains to the modal verb "will".


----------



## david13

Milton Sand said:


> Hi!
> I'm sorry, I think I haven't understood it yet. Let's blame my biorhythm of today.
> ***
> *Question:*
> Is it that neither of the main verbs ("do" or "despise") need to be preceded by "to" due to the presence of the conjugated auxiliar "does"?
> 
> Have I understood it? Thanks fot *for* your patient! *patience*!



Hola Milton: Acabo de encontrar un artículo excelente que contiene una discusión detallada del uso del "bare infinitive". Es por la BBC pero se aplica tanto al inglés americano.  ¡Espero que te sirva!

Saludos,

_*David*_


----------



## cubaMania

Milton Sand said:


> Hi!
> I'm sorry, I think I haven't understood it yet. Let's blame my biorhythm of today.
> 
> Well, let me analize (_I just used a bare infinitive!) _my example:
> I think I had two sentences: She does not do anything else and She despises herself or She does despise herself.
> 
> She _does_ not -> Conjugation of auxiliar in negative
> not -> negation adverb
> do -> first sentence's main verb in bare infinitive
> anything else ->direct object of "do" // End of first sentence.
> but -> conjunction that joins both sentences while cancels the effect of "not".
> *to* despise herself ->second sentence, with a main verb in infinitive and a reflexive pronoun, sharing the subject with the first sentence.
> 
> *Question:*
> Is it that neither of the main verbs ("do" or "despise") need to be preceded by "to" due to the presence of the conjugated auxiliar "does"?
> 
> Have I understood it? Thanks lot for your patience!


You have it almost right.
This is not actually two sentences. What you have here is a correlative conjunction relating two items.


> *Correlative conjunctions* are pairs of conjunctions that work together to coordinate two items. English examples include _both … and_, _either … or_, _neither … nor_, and _not (only) … but (… also)_.


The form is this: *not* X* but* Y.

She does *not* do anything else *but* despise herself.
So the pronoun and the conjugated auxiliary verb "She does" are followed by the bare infinitive main verbs "do" and "despise" connected by the correlative conjunction.
She does NOT x BUT y.
She does *not* (do anything else) *but* (despise herself.)


----------



## Barbara S.

I don't believe you ever use "to" with a modal verb - do, willl, can, may, must etc. But you use "to" with the main verb. I must go. vs. I need to go. I won't go. I want to go.

You do use "to" after a gerund. I'm learning to speak Spanish.  You always use "to" when using the infinitive as a noun. To be or not to be...  To drive or to walk... "To walk is the best option." = "Walking is the best option."


----------



## Outsider

This is a quote from the article that *David13* mentioned above:



> There are one or two other structures where to-infinitive and the bare infinitive are both possible. Expressions with _do_ or _did_, such as _what I've done_ or _all I did_ can follow either pattern.
> 
> _I hate shopping so what I've done is (to) order a new computer over the Internet.
> 
> All I did was (to) suggest that she should lend him no more money. I didn't insist on it.​_


----------



## mhp

Outsider said:


> This is a quote from the article that *David13* mentioned above:


  I agree with those quotes. But in some constructions with “do”, inclusion of “to” sounds really odd to me:

  He doesn’t do anything but ( ) read books.


----------



## Milton Sand

Hi!
David13's recommended article was quite clarifying: "_When two infinitive structures are connected by *and*, or *or*, *except* or *but* and *than* or *as*, it is normal practice to omit *to* in the second clause_."

And I think Cubamania's great comment "_*not* X *but* Y_" made me understood better the structure from a different point of view.

Very good! Thank you all!


----------



## NonComposMentis

Milton Sand said:


> Hi!
> David13's recommended article was quite clarifying: "_When two infinitive structures are connected by *and*, or *or*, *except* or *but* and *than* or *as*, it is normal practice to omit *to* in the second clause_."



Hola Milton:

This information is correct, but I don't think it applies to your sentence. You are not dropping the "to" because there is no "to" to drop.



Milton Sand said:


> And I think Cubamania's great comment "_*not* X *but* Y_" made me understood better the structure from a different point of view.



Yes, Cubamania outlined this very clearly. You are dropping "she does". The problem here is that English is quite rigid about parallel constructions. You _must_ understand the "deep structure" here as including "does" even though it is not expressed.


----------



## Milton Sand

Well, NonCompos, I had made the mistake of writing originally:
She doesn't do anything else but *to* despise herself.
See?
Thanks for confirming and make me realize one more thing (that of dropping "she does").


----------



## Mattterhorn

Hello,
I am reading a Spanish law translated into English, probably by a Spanish person, and all the articles start wit the infinitive. In the translation into English they are all bare infinitives. Is this right? I thought that you have to use either a gerund or a to-infinitive.
Example:
1) Expresarse e interactuar oralmente de forma espontánea, comprensible y respetuosa, con fluidez y precisión, utilizando estrategias adecuadas a las situaciones de comunicación.
1) express and interact oraly in a spontaneous, comprehensible and respectful way, with fluidity and accuracy, using strategies suitable to the particular communicative need.

Shouldn't it be 1) To express and interact...??
Thanks!


----------



## SevenDays

Mattterhorn said:


> Hello,
> I am reading a Spanish law translated into English, probably by a Spanish person, and all the articles start wit the infinitive. In the translation into English they are all bare infinitives. Is this right? I thought that you have to use either a gerund or a to-infinitive.
> Example:
> 1) Expresarse e interactuar oralmente de forma espontánea, comprensible y respetuosa, con fluidez y precisión, utilizando estrategias adecuadas a las situaciones de comunicación.
> 1) express and interact oraly in a spontaneous, comprehensible and respectful way, with fluidity and accuracy, using strategies suitable to the particular communicative need.
> 
> Shouldn't it be 1) To express and interact...??
> Thanks!



It's not really a question of grammar per se, given that both the to-infinitive and the bare finitive can be used (or, more precisely, the use of the to-infinitive is not wrong or ungrammatical). What selects the bare infinitive is semantics; the to-infinitive is _*prospective*_ in nature, while the bare infinitive is _*concurrent*_. That's why the bare infinitive is used: "express and interact" agree temporally/concur with "using strategies" in that they are timeless (they refer to _any_ time). For the same reason, we drop the "to" in "she doesn't do anything but despise herself" because the intended meaning is concurrent and not prospective.

Cheers


----------



## Milton Sand

Mattterhorn said:


> Hello,
> I am reading a Spanish law translated into English, probably by a Spanish person, and all the articles start wit the infinitive. In the translation into English they are all bare infinitives. Is this right? I thought that you have to use either a gerund or a to-infinitive.
> Example:
> 1) Expresarse e interactuar oralmente de forma espontánea, comprensible y respetuosa, con fluidez y precisión, utilizando estrategias adecuadas a las situaciones de comunicación.
> 1) express and interact oraly in a spontaneous, comprehensible and respectful way, with fluidity and accuracy, using strategies suitable to the particular communicative need.
> 
> Shouldn't it be 1) To express and interact...??
> Thanks!


Hola:
Yo diría que es caso especial al tratarse de instrucciones, que en español pueden ir en infinitivo, o en impersonal (_Se expresa y se interactúa_), o en imperativo (_Exprésese e interactúe_); mientras que en inglés el imperativo impera y de ahí que se usen los verbos pelados: _Express and interact_ creo que está en imperativo, no en infinitivo.


----------



## yap

I thought just like you, Milton but...look at this link:

http://digibuo.uniovi.es/dspace/bitstream/10651/27954/6/TFM AnaMenendezRodriguez.pdf

where they enumarate the objectives of the foreign language area and they state them by saying:
1. Express oneself and interact...
2. Understand global and specific information of oral texts...
3. Write different types of texts...

and so on...this is new for me too. I thought the "to" was an imperative!


----------



## cubaMania

yap, I took a look at the link in your post #20.  I suggest that you not use this as a model.


> According to Decree 1467/2007, these are the skills that students should develop when learning a foreign language:
> 1. Express oneself and interact in a spontaneous...


I doubt that a native English speaker would express a list of skills in that way.

The "skill" is not "express oneself..."; the "skill" is "the ability to express oneself..." or something similar.

Notice that in the list immediately above the one you reference, they do a better job by introducing a list in this way:


> ...the development of several capacities that will enable them to:
> a). Participate in democratic citizenship...


There the introductory phrase "that will enable them to:" becomes an understood part of each item listed.

(An alternative way to list a set of skills would be to list them as nouns of some sort,
e.g.
1. Spontaneous expression and interaction...)


----------



## yap

cubaMania said:


> yap, I took a look at the link in your post #20.  I suggest that you not use this as a model.
> 
> I doubt that a native English speaker would express a list of skills in that way.
> 
> The "skill" is not "express oneself..."; the "skill" is "the ability to express oneself..." or something similar.
> 
> Notice that in the list immediately above the one you reference, they do a better job by introducing a list in this way:
> 
> There the introductory phrase "that will enable them to:" becomes an understood part of each item listed.
> 
> (An alternative way to list a set of skills would be to list them as nouns of some sort,
> e.g.
> 1. Spontaneous expression and interaction...)



I see CubaMania...what I would like to know for sure is whether it is possible to use these verbs without the "to", personally I thought it was a must, previous to watching this link. Now I don't know.


----------



## cubaMania

The heart of your confusion, I think, comes from the fact that you are failing to distinguish between a thing (noun) and an action (verb).  You need to look to the introductory sentence to find out how the items in the list should be expressed.  In your example, the introductory sentence claims that what will follow is a list of "skills".  A skill is a thing you have or possess, a noun.  "Express oneself..." is not a thing, not a skill; it is an action.  It is not something you must possess, it is something you must do, so to use that list you would need to change the introductory sentence to match the type of item listed.

To more directly answer your question 





> ...what I would like to know for sure is whether it is possible to use these verbs without the "to"...


 I will give an example which uses the principles discussed at the start of this thread:
"What the candidate must be able to do:
1. Express himself and interact...
2. Understand global and specific information of oral texts...
3. Write different types of texts..."


----------



## yap

From your example I understand that the "to" is necessary, because if I leave out the verb "do" (what I understand it is perfectly possible), the sentence should be:
The candidate must be able* to*:
1. Express himself and interact...
2. Understand global and specific information of oral texts...
3. Write different types of texts..."

And in the example of the link I gave previously, it should be:
The objectives of the foreign language area are:
1. *To* express oneself and interact...
2. *To* understand global and specific information of oral texts...
3. *To* write different types of texts...

Is that right CubaMania? Thanks. It is most important for me to know, because that's what I thought from the beginning and then I got confused.


----------



## cubaMania

Good.  As explained at the beginning of the thread, it is the use of the auxiliary "do" that allows the use of the bare infinitive.
The first example in your latest post is fine.
The second example is pretty good in terms of understanding the principle you are attempting to master, however, for a finicky speaker, there is a logical problem.  It is the student, not "the foreign language area", that will express..., understand... and write....
The objective of the foreign language area is to teach the student(s):
1.  To express himself(themselves)...
2.  To understand...
3.  To write...
The objectives of a student in the foreign language area are:
1.  To express himself...
2.  To understand...
3.  To write...


----------



## yap

Thanks, CubaMania. Now I'm clear!


----------



## Forero

There are lots of things going on in this thread, and there is a lot of misinformation.

First, the original sentence:





Milton Sand said:


> A gentle forum member corrected me a suggested:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, you would say ①"She doesn't do anything else but *to* despise herself." Drop the "to".
> 
> 
> 
> In which cases should I dispense with that "to"?
> 
> Thanks in advance and regards!
Click to expand...

In the red sentence, the transitive verb _do_ is used with the direct object _anything_. Transitive _do_ is in bare infinitive form in this sentence because of the auxiliary _does_, but it is the transitive _do_, not the auxiliary _does_, that enables the bare infinitive _despise_. Some other examples of this use of transitive _do_:

②_She does nothing but despise herself._ [transitive _do_ in present tense, no auxiliary _do_]
③_All she does is despise herself._ [transitive _do_ in present tense, no auxiliary _do_]
④_All she has done is despise herself._ [transitive _do_ in past participle form after auxiliary _has_, no auxiliary _do_]
⑤_All she does do is despise herself. _[auxiliary _does_ for emphasis, followed by bare infinitive of transitive _do_]

All of these numbered examples are correct sentences.

It is tempting to say, for example, that sentence ② works because we can say "She does despise herself", and that sentence ①, the red sentence, works because we can say "She doesn't despise herself", but that would be inconsistent, as I hope a careful look at sentences ④ and ⑤ makes clear.

We don't just take words out and see if what is left makes sense. For example, neither "She has despise herself" nor "She has done despise herself" makes sense, and "She does do despise herself" is also nonsensical.

In all five numbered sentences, _despise_ is a bare infinitive, and a _to_ infinitive is also possible. The bare infinitive is preferable in all five, though, because a _to_ infinitive in this environment might be ambiguous, with the _to_ having the alternative reading "in order to" (= "_para_")_._

The question about translating a list is unrelated to transitive _do_:





Mattterhorn said:


> Hello,
> I am reading a Spanish law translated into English, probably by a Spanish person, and all the articles start wit the infinitive. In the translation into English they are all bare infinitives. Is this right? I thought that you have to use either a gerund or a to-infinitive.
> Example:
> 1) Expresarse e interactuar oralmente de forma espontánea, comprensible y respetuosa, con fluidez y precisión, utilizando estrategias adecuadas a las situaciones de comunicación.
> 1) express and interact oraly in a spontaneous, comprehensible and respectful way, with fluidity and accuracy, using strategies suitable to the particular communicative need.
> 
> Shouldn't it be 1) To express and interact...??
> Thanks!


Yes. In the context of "these are the skills" followed by a list, neither imperatives nor bare infinitives are appropriate.


----------

