CMOS has not, since the thirteenth edition (1983), frowned on the split infinitive. The sixteenth edition suggests, to take one example, allowing split infinitives when an intervening adverb is used for emphasis (see paragraphs 5.106 and 5.168). In this day and age, it seems, an injunction against splitting infinitives is one of those shibboleths whose only reason for survival is to give increased meaning to the lives of those who can both identify by name a discrete grammatical, syntactic, or orthographic entity and notice when that entity has been somehow besmirched. Many such shibboleths—the en dash, for example—are worthy of being held onto. But why tamper with such sentences as the following?Oxford more or less agrees, asserting as follows: "The ‘rule’ against splitting infinitives isn’t followed as strictly today as it used to be. Nevertheless, some people do object very strongly to them. As a result, it’s safest to avoid split infinitives in formal writing, unless the alternative wording seems very clumsy or would alter the meaning of your sentence," and The Guardian and Observer style guide notes:
Its five-year mission is to explore new worlds, seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before.It seems to me that, at least given these two examples, euphony or emphasis or clarity or all three can be improved by splitting the infinitive in certain situations. It’s one of the advantages of a language with two-word infinitives. One might observe, for that matter, that English infinitives are always split—by a space.
His first thought, when something went wrong, was to immediately hit the escape key—even when he was nowhere near a computer.
Raymond Chandler wrote to his publisher: "Would you convey my compliments to the purist who reads your proofs and tell him or her that I write in a sort of broken-down patois which is something like the way a Swiss waiter talks, and that when I split an infinitive, God damn it, I split it so it will stay split." And after an editor tinkered with his infinitives, George Bernard Shaw said: "I don't care if he is made to go quickly, or to quickly go – but go he must!"Wikipedia, of course, has much to say on the controversy, but is it one? I guess the question is this -- is this something about which you care at all, or are you going to willy-nilly split your infinitives when writing?
added: Poll results! Split infinitives -- "whenever you feel like it" (53%) wins over "sparingly" (40%) and "never" (5%).
I stand on the sidelines on this question; I hate to sound loosey-goosey on this one, but I feel if the sentence sounds good this is a rule that you can ignore to your delight.
ReplyDeleteMore importantly, my beloved Chicago Manual misquoted Star Trek! The proper line is: "<span>Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before." I've always loved that little pause for the colon. (Also, the Wiki page on the line, it's history and evolution is worth a read.)</span>
/horrible nerd
I have to say, I love the section from CMOS. It extols the en dash, but contains four em dashes. They really love their em dashes, it seems.
ReplyDelete(Is it just me or does "extolls" seem better than "extol"? I'm not sure why I think that...)
I split infinitives at will. Not something I would edit for, in my writing or others', or frankly at this point even notice.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't care less about split infinitives, and yeah, like Tosy and Cosh, I don't think I notice them, even.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if there's an age gradient with this one; I was born in 1978 and was only taught by my older teachers that it was not okay to split infinitives. The younger ones didn't teach the "rule", so I never adopted it.
I used to be an infinitive splitter, but my Ph.D. advisor was very strict on the subject and drilled it out of me. Now split infinitives jump out at me whenever I read and it's distracting and irritating. It's not that I care personally, I just can't help but notice them now.
ReplyDeleteI think it's okay to split 'em. For me, sentence clarity is king. As long as I can understand what the sentence means, the split can stay.
ReplyDeleteI had a boss who told me that the rule against split infinitives was created by a society that wanted to mimic the Latin practice (where infinitives are a single word) as part of an overall goal of elevating the respectability of the English language and to create some separation between high English and low English. That may be complete fiction, but I thought it was interesting that his indifference to split infinitives was, to him, a stand against The Man.
ReplyDeleteNo controversy, no rule—there is nothing wrong with splitting infinitives (nor with ending a sentence or phrase with a preposition, Mr. About Which—is that like the Nemo toy in Monsters, Inc., a hint of what's in store for future installments?)
ReplyDeleteHowever, like its reviled twin the preposition at the end of a sentence, a naturally occurring split infinitive can be a prompt to look a little closer at word order, to see if there's a simpler way to say what you're trying to say. No writer should resort to convoluted phrasing to "fix" a split infinitive, but sometimes a split infinitive is indicating that the phrasing is already more convoluted than it needs to be. But if you look closer and see that it's good how it is, then it's good how it is.
So...yes to splitting infinitives, no to willy-nilly.
I've gotten used to avoiding split infinitives, and so I do. I also think that there are enough people who hate split infinitives to justify trying to avoid them.
ReplyDeleteWhen I teach writing, I always say that they need to know the rule because people over a certain age will be made crazy by it. I think the greatest legal writing skill you can internalize is learning how to change your writing style to suit the partner supervising you, so you'd better know what that partner means when they say they hate split infinitives.
ReplyDeleteI split 'em all the time. Much like the "rule" about ending sentences with prepositions, strict adherence to the split infinitives rule can make for horribly awkward sentences. That is a situation up with which I will not put.
Loved Ben Affleck's use of that phrase to mock Keith Olbermann's pedantry. (And I'm a huge Olbermann fan, as well as someone who tends to avoid ending sentences with prepositions, but the mockery was right on target.)
ReplyDeleteNo one ever taught split infinitives in my junior high or high school classes, and even as an English major who wrote dozens of papers in college, I don't remember it ever coming up. I never thought about it until I became a fundraiser/grantwriter, and my boss had a thing for getting rid of them. So I watch out for split infinitives to please her, and I suppose to please old-fashioned funders who would see it as an example of bad writing. But I personally don't care or think it matters at all.
ReplyDeleteI don't have an issue with split infinitives. In my opinion, certain grammatical rules (much like rules of etiquette) exist only to make some people feel superior to others while forcing everyone to adopt an artificial and unwieldy style.
ReplyDeleteOf course, I inevitably will train myself to avoid them for partners who care. But sadly, that becomes a self-perpetuating cycle where each generation comes to care about a stupid rule because the people who trained them were trained to care about a stupid rule.
It's originally a Churchillism, I believe. But via Affleck:
ReplyDelete<span>We have seen this fear before: in Cambodia, under Pol Pot. [ image: skulls and bones ] In Russia, under Stalin. [ image: Stalin ] In Massachusetts, under Mitt Romney. [ image: Mitt Romney ] It is the FEAR, sir, and the TYRANNY of with which we DARE no longer PUT!! I pray thee, sir, let us have done with it!! </span>
That last line says more about the nonsense of the idiom "to put up with" than the strength of the rule regarding ending sentences with prepositions.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Marsha on this: know the rule, know your audience, but split at will.
ReplyDeleteI will split when necessary. In my senior thesis, one of my readers commented--and it was 1 of 3 comments offered--that I shouldn't split an infinitive. I don't remember the sentence now but I distinctly remember that positioning the adverb before or after the adverb would have completely changed the sense of what I wanted to convey. I guess, per Christy, I could have rewritten the sentence in such a way that splitting the infinitive wouldn't have been necessary. But how much did this reader even care what I wrote if 1/3 of the comments on a 50-page paper was about a split I finite. Save your pencil lead, Professor.
ReplyDeleteSplit infinitive--stupid autocorrect.
ReplyDeleteI think one can appreciate the Churchillian "up with which I will not put" (nb: I recently read that it has been attributed to sources prior to Churchill) while still thinking that it is the rare sentence whose optimal construction ends in a preposition. I'll agree with Christy in NYC that that doesn't mean it's wrong, but ugly and wrong are two different things. If Churchill (or whoever) were not just making a point, he would have said "I simply will not put up with some things," or perhaps "I will brook not your ersatz grammarian pedantry," or something like that.
ReplyDeleteits.
ReplyDeleteMy mom loves the "up with which i will not put" phrase and always attributed it to Ogden Nash.
ReplyDeleteI purposely split infinitives out of spite. It's the stupidest rule ever. On the other hand, I'll do anything to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition. It all comes back to "whichever way I do it is the only right way, whether I'm for the rule or against it," which seems to be the common thread running through the entire Grammar Rodeo.
ReplyDeleteNever let it be said that Adlai doesn't respect a party theme.
ReplyDelete<span>one of those shibboleths whose only reason for survival is to give increased meaning to the lives of those who can both identify by name a discrete grammatical, syntactic, or orthographic entity and notice when that entity has been somehow besmirched. </span>
ReplyDeleteA fabulous description and one that describes far more so-called rules than just the split infinitive. For the purposes of peace, however, I will avoid naming them.