What is a Split Infinitive? A US Writer's Guide

Informal, Friendly, Professional, Neutral

Expository, Analytical, Argumentative, Journalistic

Demystifying the Split Infinitive: What's the Big Deal?

The split infinitive. Just the name can send shivers down the spines of grammar sticklers and spark heated debates among language enthusiasts. But what exactly is a split infinitive, and why does it cause so much fuss? Let's break it down.

Understanding the Infinitive: The Foundation

At its core, an infinitive is a verb form that typically consists of the word "to" followed by the base form of the verb. Think of classic examples like "to run," "to sing," "to dance," or even the seemingly simple "to be." Infinitives often function as nouns, adjectives, or adverbs within a sentence, adding flexibility to our language.

Defining the "Split": The Heart of the Controversy

The "split" occurs when an adverb or adverbial phrase is inserted between the "to" and the verb in the infinitive. Suddenly, "to run" becomes "to quickly run," and "to sing" transforms into "to loudly sing."

It's this insertion that some consider a grammatical transgression, an offense against linguistic purity. The most famous example? "To boldly go where no man has gone before," from Star Trek. This phrase, while iconic, is often cited as a prime example of a split infinitive.

The Prevalence of Split Infinitives in American English

Here's the thing: split infinitives are everywhere, especially in American English. You've likely used them yourself without even realizing it. The reality is that, whether consciously or not, people use split infinitives frequently in both spoken and written language.

Their ubiquity begs the question: if they're so common, why the controversy? Is it simply a matter of adherence to outdated rules, or is there a legitimate reason to avoid them? We'll be exploring that.

This widespread usage provides a crucial context for understanding the split infinitive debate. The very fact that it's so prevalent suggests that it fulfills a communicative need, even if it clashes with certain grammatical sensibilities.

A Historical Journey: The Origins of the Split Infinitive "Rule"

Now that we've established what a split infinitive is, it's time to journey back in time and explore where this aversion to them originated. The story is quite fascinating, revealing much about the ever-evolving nature of language and grammar.

England: The Seed of the "Rule"

The disapproval of split infinitives isn't some ancient, immutable law of language. In fact, its roots are relatively recent, tracing back to 19th-century England. Here, grammarians, influenced by the perceived elegance and order of Latin, sought to impose similar structures on the English language.

Latin infinitives, being single words, cannot be "split."

This led to the notion that English infinitives, though composed of "to" + verb, should similarly remain inviolable.

Essentially, some scholars attempted to graft Latin grammatical structures onto English, even when it didn't naturally fit.

Henry Alford: The Split Infinitive's Great Denouncer

One name stands out in this historical narrative: Henry Alford. As Dean of Canterbury and a prominent writer on the English language, Alford held considerable sway.

His 1866 book, A Plea for the Queen's English, condemned the split infinitive.

While not the first to voice disapproval, Alford’s high profile and authoritative tone helped solidify the aversion in the minds of many.

He essentially popularized the idea that splitting an infinitive was a grammatical error. Alford's influence was such that his opinion became widely accepted, despite lacking a sound linguistic basis.

Prescriptivism vs. Descriptivism: Two Schools of Thought

Understanding the split infinitive debate requires grasping the concepts of prescriptivism and descriptivism.

Prescriptivism is the approach of enforcing strict rules on language use, dictating what is "correct" and "incorrect."

Prescriptivists believe in maintaining a standard of language, often based on historical precedent or perceived logical consistency.

Conversely, descriptivism observes how language is actually used, without imposing value judgments.

Descriptivists analyze language as it evolves naturally, acknowledging that usage patterns change over time.

The aversion to split infinitives is largely a prescriptivist stance. It attempts to impose a rule based on an external standard (Latin grammar), rather than reflecting actual English usage.

Shifting Tides: The Evolution of Grammar

The good news is that language is dynamic.

Grammar rules aren't set in stone, carved on some ancient tablet. They evolve over time, reflecting how people actually speak and write.

What was once considered an error can, with sufficient usage, become accepted as standard.

The split infinitive is a prime example. Despite the historical objections, it has become increasingly common and accepted in modern English, especially in American English. The language evolves organically.

Deconstructing the Arguments: Why Avoid Split Infinitives?

Now that we've journeyed back in time and explored where this aversion to them originated, it's time to dissect the reasoning behind why some people consider split infinitives to be grammatical abominations. Let's be frank: are these arguments truly sound, or are they built on shaky foundations? Let's find out.

The Logic (or Lack Thereof)

The most common argument against split infinitives hinges on the idea that they're inherently ungrammatical. But where does this idea come from? Often, it's traced back to an attempt to force English into the mold of Latin grammar.

In Latin, infinitives are single words, so splitting them is impossible. However, English isn't Latin.

Trying to apply Latin rules to English is like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole – it simply doesn't work, and it ignores the unique character of the English language.

Furthermore, some claim that split infinitives are illogical or violate some unspoken rule of sentence construction. These claims are often vague and unsupported by any real evidence.

Concerns About Clarity: Do Split Infinitives Cause Confusion?

A far more reasonable concern is whether split infinitives actually impair clarity. Do they make sentences confusing or ambiguous?

In most cases, the answer is a resounding "no." Consider the classic example: "to boldly go." Would moving the adverb elsewhere make the sentence clearer? Probably not.

In fact, trying to avoid the split might result in something far more awkward: "boldly to go" or "to go boldly," both of which sound stilted and unnatural.

Clarity, it turns out, often benefits from the strategic placement of the adverb within the infinitive.

However, it's crucial to admit, if a split infinitive causes genuine ambiguity, then rewriting the sentence is advisable.

For example, a sentence such as "to carefully and painstakingly restore" is arguably better written as "to restore carefully and painstakingly," due to the multiple adverbs.

Grammar Rules and Communication

Ultimately, grammar rules are meant to serve communication, not the other way around. When a rule actively hinders clear and effective expression, it's time to question its value.

Rigid adherence to prescriptive rules can sometimes lead to convoluted sentences that obscure meaning. Flexibility is key.

If forcing yourself to avoid a split infinitive results in an awkward or unnatural sentence, then the "rule" is clearly getting in the way of effective communication.

Good writing is about making choices that enhance clarity and readability, even if it means occasionally bending a "rule."

Syntax Impact on Readability

Does the split infinitive have a significant negative impact on sentence structure and readability? Again, the answer is usually no.

In many cases, a split infinitive can actually improve the flow of a sentence. The placement of the adverb can provide emphasis and create a more natural rhythm.

However, it's important to be mindful of how the split affects the overall structure. Overly long or complex splits can indeed disrupt the flow and make the sentence harder to understand.

For instance, "to, after carefully considering all the options and consulting with experts, finally decide" is a poorly constructed sentence due to the excessive length of the split.

In such cases, rewriting is definitely warranted. But the problem isn't the split infinitive itself; it's the excessive length and complexity of the intervening phrase.

In conclusion, the arguments against split infinitives often crumble under scrutiny. They are based on shaky logic, rarely impact clarity, and can sometimes hinder effective communication. While mindful usage is always advised, the fear of splitting infinitives is, in many cases, unwarranted.

The Case for Flexibility: Embracing the Split Infinitive

Now that we've journeyed back in time and explored where this aversion to them originated, it's time to dissect the reasoning behind why some people consider split infinitives to be grammatical abominations. Let's be frank: are these arguments truly sound, or are they built on shaky foundations?

As we'll see, sometimes the "rule" against split infinitives is more trouble than it's worth.

Emphasis: When Splitting Makes Sense

The most compelling argument for the split infinitive is its ability to provide emphasis where it's needed most. Consider the sentence, "He wanted to quickly finish the report."

Now, consider "He wanted to quickly finish the report." This minor change highlights the speed with which he intended to finish the task.

Without splitting the infinitive, achieving the same emphasis might require awkward rephrasing.

Sometimes, a split infinitive simply sounds more natural and direct. To avoid it can weaken the sentence's impact.

Avoiding Awkwardness: The Pitfalls of Rigidity

Sometimes, the determination to avoid a split infinitive leads to sentences that are clunky, convoluted, and downright bizarre.

Think of the phrase "to really understand."

An attempt to avoid the split could produce "really to understand" or "to understand really," both of which sound unnatural.

The forced rearrangement detracts from the intended meaning and creates an unnecessary burden on the reader. Clarity should always trump blind adherence to rules.

Style Guides: Setting the Record Straight

Contrary to popular belief, many reputable style guides are not dogmatic about split infinitives. They often acknowledge that splitting an infinitive is acceptable, and even preferable, in certain contexts.

AP Style

The Associated Press (AP) stylebook, a staple for journalists, advises writers to consider the alternatives. If moving the adverb results in awkwardness, splitting the infinitive is permissible.

The Chicago Manual of Style

The Chicago Manual of Style is more permissive, suggesting that a split infinitive is often acceptable and can even be desirable for clarity and emphasis.

These authorities recognize that language evolves, and rigid rules often stifle effective communication.

American English vs. British English

The perception of split infinitives can differ slightly between American and British English. Generally, American English is more tolerant of split infinitives than its British counterpart.

However, even in British English, the hard-line stance against split infinitives is softening, as demonstrated by language experts and common usage.

Expert Insights: Weighing in on the Debate

Now that we've journeyed back in time and explored where this aversion to them originated, it's time to dissect the reasoning behind why some people consider split infinitives to be grammatical abominations. Let's be frank: are these arguments truly sound, or are they built on shaky foundations?

To get to the bottom of this, let's turn to the voices of some of the most respected authorities on the English language. We'll explore the nuanced perspectives of grammarians and style experts like H.W. Fowler, Theodore Bernstein, and Bryan A. Garner. Let's delve into the perspectives of these authorities.

W. Fowler: A Nuanced View

H.W. Fowler, co-author of The King's English and A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, is often cited in discussions about split infinitives.

However, his stance isn't as straightforward as some might believe. He didn't issue an outright ban.

Instead, Fowler advocated for a case-by-case approach. He acknowledged that avoiding a split infinitive could sometimes lead to awkward or unnatural sentence constructions.

Fowler advised writers to consider the alternatives and choose the option that resulted in the clearest and most elegant prose. His approach recognized the importance of style and rhythm in writing.

Ultimately, Fowler's view suggests that the goal is effective communication rather than rigid adherence to rules.

Theodore Bernstein: Clarity Above All

Theodore Bernstein, a renowned editor and author of several books on writing and grammar, also took a pragmatic approach to the split infinitive.

Bernstein, like Fowler, prioritized clarity and naturalness. He argued that splitting an infinitive was permissible if it improved the flow and readability of a sentence.

His philosophy centered on the idea that grammar should serve communication, not the other way around.

He stressed the importance of avoiding awkward constructions that resulted from trying too hard to adhere to arbitrary rules.

Bernstein’s position was that a well-placed adverb could, in some instances, enhance the meaning and impact of the verb, making the split infinitive the most logical choice.

Bryan A. Garner: Modern Perspectives

Bryan A. Garner, a modern authority on legal and general writing, offers a contemporary perspective on the split infinitive debate. As the editor of Garner's Modern English Usage, his opinions carry considerable weight.

Garner acknowledges the historical prejudice against split infinitives but notes that their acceptance has grown over time.

He points out that attempting to avoid splitting infinitives can often lead to convoluted and unnatural phrasing.

Garner advocates for a sensible approach, suggesting that a split infinitive is acceptable when it sounds natural and improves clarity.

However, he cautions against splitting infinitives unnecessarily or when doing so creates ambiguity. Essentially, Garner advises writers to exercise good judgment and prioritize effective communication over blind adherence to outdated rules.

In conclusion, these expert insights reveal a common thread: prioritize clarity, naturalness, and effective communication. The split infinitive, therefore, should be viewed as a tool—to be used judiciously, but not feared.

Navigating Modern Style Guides: AP, Chicago, and Beyond

Now that we've explored expert perspectives on the split infinitive, it's time to turn our attention to the guidelines offered by some of the most respected style guides in the English language. These guides often serve as arbiters of correctness for writers and editors, shaping our understanding of what constitutes "proper" grammar and style. But what do they really say about split infinitives? Let's dive in.

The Associated Press (AP): Their Stance

The AP Stylebook, often considered the bible for journalists and news writers, takes a relatively pragmatic approach to the split infinitive.

It doesn't outright ban them, but advises writers to avoid splitting infinitives "unless a more clear or natural wording would result."

In essence, AP prioritizes clarity and readability above all else.

If splitting the infinitive makes the sentence flow better and avoids awkward phrasing, it's generally acceptable.

However, if the sentence can be easily rewritten to avoid the split without sacrificing clarity, that's the preferred route.

The University of Chicago Press: The Chicago Manual of Style

The Chicago Manual of Style, a comprehensive guide favored by book publishers and academics, offers a more nuanced perspective.

It acknowledges the historical opposition to split infinitives, but recognizes that rigid adherence to the "rule" can sometimes lead to clumsy and unnatural prose.

Chicago suggests that split infinitives are often acceptable, particularly when they improve the rhythm or clarity of the sentence.

However, it also cautions against splitting infinitives unnecessarily, especially when the adverb can be easily moved without disrupting the sentence's meaning.

A Subtle Nuance

Interestingly, Chicago also points out that some adverbs naturally sound better between "to" and the verb, such as adverbs of degree (e.g., "to fully understand").

This highlights the importance of considering not just the presence of a split infinitive, but also the type of adverb involved.

Impact of Usage on Grammar

It's crucial to remember that grammar rules are not static decrees handed down from on high.

They evolve over time, shaped by the way people actually use the language.

As certain constructions become more common and widely accepted, style guides often adapt to reflect these changes.

The increasing acceptance of split infinitives in modern writing is a prime example of this phenomenon.

What was once considered a grave error is now often viewed as a stylistic choice, a testament to the dynamic nature of language itself.

The prescriptivist stance of banning the constructions outright is eroding as more and more people are using them.

The style guides are also adapting, and it's clear that the descriptive stance is gaining momentum.

Style Guides (Digital Versions)

In today's digital age, many style guides are available as online resources, offering writers quick and easy access to rules and recommendations.

These digital versions often include search functions, interactive examples, and even grammar-checking tools, making it easier than ever to navigate the complexities of English style.

Moreover, some digital tools provide contextual suggestions, analyzing the sentence and suggesting whether splitting the infinitive would improve or detract from the overall clarity.

The digital format can also promote inclusivity, as more authors may be exposed to the writing resources than ever before.

With the use of new LLMs and AI to help with writing, these tools will improve.

These resources can be invaluable for writers who want to ensure their work adheres to established style conventions.

Ultimately, navigating modern style guides requires a critical and discerning eye.

While these guides offer valuable guidance, they should not be treated as inflexible dogma. The best writers understand the rules, but also know when and how to bend them to achieve their desired effect.

Practical Considerations: When to Use and When to Avoid

Navigating Modern Style Guides: AP, Chicago, and Beyond Now that we've explored expert perspectives on the split infinitive, it's time to turn our attention to the guidelines offered by some of the most respected style guides in the English language. These guides often serve as arbiters of correctness for writers and editors, shaping our understanding of grammatical best practices. With this in mind, it’s easy to assume that usage must be one way or the other.

However, even when seemingly concrete rules are issued, it is important to remember the context.

But even with the wisdom of experts and style guides, the choice of when to split or not to split remains a nuanced one. Ultimately, the decision often rests on practical considerations related to audience and context.

Knowing Your Audience

Who are you writing for? This is the single most important question to ask yourself before committing to any grammatical choice, including the split infinitive. Your audience's expectations and preferences should heavily influence your decision.

If you're writing for a highly conservative audience, such as a formal academic journal or a traditional business report, it might be wise to err on the side of caution and avoid split infinitives altogether.

This is because, even if they aren't inherently ungrammatical, they can still be perceived as such by some readers.

On the other hand, if you're writing for a more general audience, such as a blog post or a marketing email, you might have more leeway to use split infinitives where they improve the flow or emphasis of your writing.

Understand your readership; tailor your prose.

Understanding the Writing Situation

The context of your writing is just as important as your audience. A formal report, a casual blog post, a legal document, or a creative writing piece each carry different expectations for language use.

For instance, a legal document demands precision and adherence to established conventions, making split infinitives potentially undesirable due to the heightened scrutiny.

A creative writing piece, on the other hand, may thrive on breaking traditional rules for stylistic effect, creating room for split infinitives that enhance the rhythm or impact of the sentence.

Consider the medium: A tweet calls for brevity, potentially forcing the use of a split infinitive to save space.

A scholarly article provides room to rephrase and avoid the split.

Adapt to the situation; writing is contextual.

Situations for Caution

While we’ve argued that split infinitives are often harmless and sometimes even beneficial, there are specific instances where avoiding them is prudent.

• When in Doubt, Revise: If you're unsure whether your audience will accept a split infinitive, the safest course of action is to revise the sentence. Look for alternative wordings that achieve the same meaning without splitting the infinitive.

• When Formality Reigns: In contexts that demand a high degree of formality, such as legal documents, formal reports, or grant proposals, avoid split infinitives unless you're certain they won't be perceived negatively.

• When Clarity is Compromised: In rare cases, a split infinitive can actually make a sentence more confusing. If you find that splitting an infinitive creates ambiguity or awkwardness, rephrase the sentence to improve clarity.

Ultimately, using split infinitives is not about blindly following or rejecting a rule. It's about making conscious, informed choices that enhance the clarity, effectiveness, and appropriateness of your writing.

By considering your audience and context, you can navigate this grammatical gray area with confidence.

So, now you know all about what a split infinitive is. While some grammar sticklers might still cringe, don't be afraid to strategically split your infinitives to achieve clarity and flow. Ultimately, good writing is about communicating effectively, and sometimes, that means bending the rules just a little. Happy writing!