I generally don't split infinitives in English. There's one case that I'm stuck on, though, because I'm not sure if there's another way to indicate the difference I have in mind: "not to do X" versus "to not do X." The former implies that X is not done, but possibly through inattention or accident; the latter, a usage borrowed mostly from the speech habits of computer scientists, implies that the not doing of X is a primary objective of one's actions.
Is there a more correct way to say this? It feels clunky every time I say it.
(What brought this to mind was a news article about the Clintons' married life, where they say that Mr. Clinton "has told friends that his No. 1 priority is not to cause her any trouble." When I read that, it seemed that "not" was modifying "is" rather than "cause," which would suggest that his next line ought to be "It's to make sure other people do! Wahahahaha!")
May 23 2006, 23:28:41 UTC 9 years ago
May 24 2006, 00:17:29 UTC 9 years ago
In general, English admits a number of parenthesization ambiguities which have to be resolved by context; one of my favorites is the Society of Black Physics Students. That one can't be resolved (AFAICT) without non-grammar inputs. The "cause trouble" example seems simpler; it looks like a case of assigning probabilistic weights to two different bindings, and finding that one binding (the "is not" one) is more likely in English as a whole than the other. So a case for natural misunderstanding.