Re: "To run is good exercise"?!

Michael Farris wrote:
>
> martinphipps2@xxxxxxxxx wrote in message
>
> > It seems that non-native speakers of English in Taiwan do not realize
> > that "To run is good exercise" is not a good English sentence. A
> > collegue today even said it was grammatically correct. I don't think
> > it is: I would never start a sentence with an infinitive.
>
> To say that would be wrong.
>
> "To run is good exercise" isn't the most idiomatic sentence going, but
> it's perfectly understandable and violates no rule that I can think
> of.
>
>
> > I have counter argued that you can meaningfully
> > say "I watch the Summer Olympics because I love swimming" but not "I
> > watch the Summer Olympics because I love to swim".
>
> Yes you can say both; the second is a little more awkward but
> understandable. If this is the worst your students do, be very glad.

It isn't awkward in the slightest; it has a different meaning. (The
subject of "swimming" isn't the speaker [well, it could be, under a
forced interpretation], the subject of "to swim" is.)
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@xxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Foreigner(s)
    ... Non-native speakers like you ... I'd say that both of those have a subtle change in meaning from the original. ... Maybe not enough to bother anyone but me. ... For what it may be worth, I have around 58 years of English experience, and I have not ever bothered to study the finer points of grammar -- same as most native speakers have done. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Foreigner(s)
    ... but the overwhelming majority finds them ... clumsy and best avoided if used at all. ... Non-native speakers like you ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"
    ... >>>Could you please enlighten us on the meaning of number 3, ... >>>don't grok. ... > saying. ... > For any non-native speakers reading, number 3 above is a legal ...
    (alt.usage.english)
Loading