1

We use ‘look forward to + gerund’. According to Cambridge the use of gerund is due to the fact that ‘to’ is a preposition when following ‘look forward’ (as opposed to an infinitive marker).

At the same time ‘drive somebody to (+ verb)’ requires the verb to be an infinitive. Cambridge itself gives ‘violent behaviour […] drove her to leave home’ as an example.

Whenever ‘drive somebody to’ is followed by a noun, ‘to’ appears to be a preposition. Cambridge on the same page lists ‘love has driven men and women to strange extremes.’ Collins mentions ‘into’ as an alternative preposition, as in ‘The recession […] drove them into bankruptcy.’

  1. Is ‘to’ in ‘drive somebody to (+ verb)’ a preposition or an infinitive marker?

  2. Assuming ‘to’ is a preposition: If the rule were to use gerund whenever ‘to’ is not an infinitive marker, wouldn’t we need to say ‘drive somebody to + gerund’, as for example ‘violent behaviour drove her to leaving home?’ Wouldn’t that be consistent with ‘look forward to + gerund?’

  3. Long story short: Why is ‘drive somebody to’ followed by an infinitive and not a gerund as e.g. ‘look forward to?’

clark.p37
  • 11

2 Answers2

2

First . . . this is not a rule: Use a gerund whenever "to" is not an infinitive marker.

When to is a preposition, it is followed by a noun or something that functions as one (including a gerund):

look forward to dinner
look forward to the meal
look forward to whatever we're having for dinner
look forward to eating

In drive somebody to ___, to is either a preposition or an infinitive marker, depending on what follows it.

When to is a preposition, drive somebody to ___ is followed by a noun or something that functions as one:

drive somebody to the edge of insanity
drive somebody to the store
drive somebody to wherever he or she needs to go
drive somebody to thinking

When drive is used in its sense of compel, drive somebody ___ is followed by a to-infinitive verb phrase—the to infinitive marker + the base form of the verb + whatever else it might need for completion:

drive somebody to leave
drive somebody to finish dinner
drive somebody to stop smoking

Sometimes you have a choice; you just need to decide what you're trying to say:

Preposition + nominal:
Love has driven men and women to strange extremes.
?Love has driven men and women to acting strangely. (somewhat awkward)
*Love has compelled men and women to acting strangely. (incorrect)

Infinitive marker + bare verb etc.:
Love has driven men and women to act strangely.
Love has compelled men and women to act strangely.

Tinfoil Hat
  • 17,008
  • The snag is, with drive someone to drink, unless one is privy to something going on deeper than the surface structure 'drink' can be noun OED: '3. ... Indulgence to excess in intoxicating liquor' or verb Longman '2 ... '[to] drink alcohol, especially regularly or too much'. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 04 '20 at 21:31
  • 1
    Yes, drink in drive someone to drink — the idiomatic expression — is a noun. If one wishes to argue that he or she means compel someone to drink, then drink is not a noun. Neither is it the idiomatic expression. We also say, idiomatically, drive someone to drinking (gerund/noun). In any case, the OP did not bring up drink, so I chose to not add to the confusion. – Tinfoil Hat Mar 04 '20 at 21:41
  • But you've not given compelling evidence that 'drive someone to drink' must be using the noun intercategorial polyseme. Farlex DoI says it's not. // '[the need for attention] drove her to become an actor' and '[the need for attention] drove her to acting' are both idiomatic; both 'drove her to become an actor' and 'drove her to acting' are evidenced on the Internet.... – Edwin Ashworth Mar 05 '20 at 10:59
  • And, for instance, on this page of Google search results, half the examples are of the 'drive someone to V' form. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 05 '20 at 11:03
  • @EdwinAshworth: I'm not sure why compelling evidence for anything unrelated to the the OP's question should be provided here. We should make Drive [someone] to drink: noun or verb? its own question. As I noted, drive to can be followed by a nominal or a bare verb, depending on the meaning. Drink can be either. I believe etymological arguments for the idiomatic expression point to noun. Meanwhile, let context be the guide: He was driven to drink, then to heroin. (noun) He was driven to drink a glass of milk. (verb) – Tinfoil Hat Mar 06 '20 at 00:22
  • 'Yes, drink in drive someone to drink — the idiomatic expression — is a noun.' is the statement that needs supporting evidence. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 06 '20 at 13:07
  • @EdwinAshworth: Right, but not here in the comments of a question that has nothing to do with drink. – Tinfoil Hat Mar 06 '20 at 13:43
  • Is it not acceptable to challenge an unsupported claim that is not all that obvious? – Edwin Ashworth Mar 06 '20 at 17:04
  • @EdwinAshworth Yes, it's acceptable. But why here? I suggest posting a question. – Tinfoil Hat Mar 06 '20 at 17:37
  • Because someone may see your decent answer, think This guy knows his stuff, read your comment 'Yes, drink in drive someone to drink – the idiomatic expression – is a noun.' and take it as Gospel. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 06 '20 at 17:45
0

Long story short: Why is ‘drive somebody to’ followed by an infinitive and not a gerund as e.g. ‘look forward to?

In to drive someone to drink, "to drink" is not an infinitive; it is a preposition + a noun. Drink(n. uncountable) = alcohol; alcoholic drinks. e.g. "Drink is only sold to adults."

It is no different from "I drove him to school" or "I drove him to distraction."

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • How about His violent behaviour drove her to leave home and His violent behaviour made her leave home? Infinitives (full and bare, respectively) following causatives? – Tinfoil Hat Mar 04 '20 at 03:47
  • @Tinfoil Hat "To leave home" is an infinitive phrase - these have several functions. In this case, it answers the question "To what state did he drive her?" Compare - "He drove her mad." Have a look at https://englishsentences.com/infinitive-phrase/ – Greybeard Mar 04 '20 at 08:54
  • 1
    My point was that in drive [someone] to ____, to is not always a preposition. Drive someone to drink, where drink is a noun preceded by a preposition, is an idiom. – Tinfoil Hat Mar 04 '20 at 16:46
  • Thank you for your answer! My question is concerned with a slightly different aspect: As you have mentioned the ‘leave’ in ‘violent behaviour drove her to leave home’ is an infinitive. I am wondering: why don’t we use a gerund (‘… to leaving home’) as e.g. in ‘she looks forward to leaving home’? – clark.p37 Mar 04 '20 at 17:16
  • 1
    The Farlex Dictionary of Idioms analyses 'to drink' here as a to-infinitive: drive (one) to (do something) ... To motivate, compel, or impel one to do something. ... The desire to set a good example for my kids drove me to finally complete my college degree. / The stress of this job is going to drive me to drink. //// I'm not sure I agree with this, but at least it's an attempt at a supporting reference. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 04 '20 at 17:24
  • @Edwin Ashworth The Farlex dictionary is wrong as far as the "to drink " example is concerned, unless the stress of the job made him thirsty. "I drove the horse to the river to drink (inf.)." "Breeding horses drove me to drink." And OED: 3. specific a. Intoxicating alcoholic beverage. Hence in various phrases: Indulgence to excess in intoxicating liquor; habits of intemperance, drunkenness. in drink: intoxicated, drunk.: 1887 H. R. Tedder in Dictionary of National Biography IX. 330/2 With advancing years Caulfield took to drink. – Greybeard Mar 04 '20 at 17:38
  • Merriam-Webster also has ‘drink’ as a noun for ‘excessive consumption of alcoholic beverages.’ Interestingly enough in their example ‘he took to drink when his business failed’ we also see a ‘to drink’… – clark.p37 Mar 04 '20 at 17:59
  • 1
    Piling up examples showing that 'drink' is also a noun proves nothing. I can add << drink [V] [intransitive] to drink alcohol, especially regularly or too much >> [Longman]. [So far] only the Farlex DoI pronounces on the actual usage involved here, though as I say, I'd like to see an authority stating the opposite. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 04 '20 at 21:24
  • @Edwin Ashworth " I'd like to see an authority stating the opposite." -- See my comment above and the quote from the OED. – Greybeard Mar 04 '20 at 22:27
  • This answer (perhaps unconsciously) rather refers to the comment by Hot Licks (to the original post) than to the original post. Therefore, the battle here is kind of attacking and defending of a strawman (as related to the original post). – Ben A. Mar 05 '20 at 10:30