1

I saw the following sentence while reading.

I realized that all my peers do is read textbooks.

My question is whether the meaning of the sentence will change if the sentence is changed to

I realized that all my peers do is to read textbooks.

I wonder if grammar of both sentences is correct and I wonder if there is any sentence structure that resembles the above for altered or unaltered meaning (if possible). Thanks.

Prem
  • 4,736
  • Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking. – Community Nov 30 '22 at 05:26
  • 2
    I think the second is wrong , while the first is correct : "All I want to do is to read" : Here the second "to" may or may not be deleted. "All I do is to read" : Here the "to" is wrong. – Prem Nov 30 '22 at 06:04

3 Answers3

0

The second one is absolutely wrong. The only situation that I can think of where a "to" in the second clause can be used in a similar setting is this. "I realized that all my peers advise (me to do) is to read textbooks. It's a case of someone telling someone else "to" do something. I realized that all my peers were told to work harder.

Greg Pyszczek
  • 72
  • 5
  • 1
    Given how common that optional infinitive marker is in OP's specific context, I don't think you can baldly dismiss it as "absolutely wrong". – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '22 at 12:14
  • Sorry, it sounds absolutely wrong is what I meant. I've never seen nor heard something like that. All they do is to read books. All my peers do is reading books. Sorry but both are still a no from me at least. If you flip it, it'll sound right at least. Reading books is all my peers do. I still wouldn't say 'To read books is all my peers do' though, however that's just old vs new usage. – Greg Pyszczek Dec 01 '22 at 11:58
  • I'm not so keen on all she does is to* clean*, but I have no problem with the gerund version all she does is cleaning**. But I definitely don't like All my friends do is lazing around** - so if there's any significant consistency about which exact contexts "allow" which verb forms (even for me as a single native speaker, let alone most / all of us), I certainly can't figure it out. Circumstances very much alter cases, here! :) – FumbleFingers Dec 01 '22 at 13:01
  • ...but that's a crucial distinction between the first sentence in you answer, and in your comment. I don't believe much of what "grammarians" say about valid / invalid syntax - so far as I'm concerned, almost everything native speakers say is valid by definition. So the assertion in your answer strikes me as "incorrect" - as opposed to the comment, where I find your position interesting. Are you in fact a native Anglophone? And your parents? – FumbleFingers Dec 01 '22 at 13:09
0

Whether or not to include the "infinitive marker" to in OP's context is a stylistic choice, and that choice seems to have changed over time. It's irrelevant whether it's all they do, or what they do, so I think almost all instances contributing to this chart will match the current context...

enter image description here

I'd say [to] read textbooks is a "noun phrase", so syntactically it's the same as All I want for Christmas is my two front teeth. So it's worth noting that after all/what [subject] [main verb] is [secondary verb-based element] whether to include the infinitive marker is heavily dependent on the "main" verb...

All it does is [to?] annoy me
What I want is to go home
All I need is to sit down for a minute
All he knows is to keep quiet

FumbleFingers
  • 140,184
  • 45
  • 294
  • 517
0

I realized that all my peers do is read textbooks. My question is whether the meaning of the sentence will change if the sentence is changed to I realized that all my peers do is to read textbooks.

The examples do not sufficiently distinguish the function of the complement. Let us change "read" to "make":

The “I realised that” is irrelevant

All that my peers do is make textbooks

All that my peers do is to make textbooks.

“That my peers do” is irrelevant

“Make textbooks” and “to make textbooks” both define “All” in their own way:

We can now rephrase to capture the semantics:

All that my peers do is make textbooks -> All [of my peers] make textbooks

All that my peers do is to make textbooks. -> All [the action of my peers] is towards the making of textbooks.

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • You seem to be saying that in All he does is [to] argue (optionally followed by additional text, such as ...for a referendum, ...with me, about the roster,...), the presence or absence of *to* determines whether "arguing" is the only thing he does, OR that he does a range of things which all promote the merits of his argument. I don't really buy that distinction. – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '22 at 14:52
  • @FumbleFingers The effect of the "to" is basically the effect of a preposition on any noun phrase - it creates a modifier -in this case - a complement. The effect, in the example, is to define "all": either "all my peers" or "all my peers' actions". – Greybeard Nov 30 '22 at 16:11
  • Hmm. I think *to* in this context is an optional "infinitive marker", not a preposition. And like I said, I don't see how including *to* somehow magically extends the scope of the relevant verb from "directly and only" (reading, making, arguing) to "enabling / promoting" that activity. – FumbleFingers Nov 30 '22 at 16:30