This is a quote by Hemingway.
Don't get discouraged because there’s a lot of mechanical work to writing.
Should not the sentence be the following one?
Don't get discouraged because there’s a lot of mechanical work to write.
This is a quote by Hemingway.
Don't get discouraged because there’s a lot of mechanical work to writing.
Should not the sentence be the following one?
Don't get discouraged because there’s a lot of mechanical work to write.
Both those sentences are grammatically correct, but they have very different meanings, and Hemingway's version is the correct one for the intended meaning.
This portion of the quote can have two meanings, depending on the structure you think it has.
...there’s a lot of mechanical work to ____ (some form of "write") ____ .
Hemingway's structure is: [ "there's a lot of" + thing-X + "to" thing-Y ], where "to" is a preposition. The meaning is, "Thing-Y requires a lot of thing-X". In Hemingway's sentence it means:
"Writing requires a lot of mechanical work."
Your structure is: [ "there's a lot of" + object + "to" + bare infinitive ], where "to" is "infinitive-to". The meaning is, "Someone needs to verb a lot of object".
A simple example would be:
There's a lot of clean laundry to fold.
The meaning here is, "Someone needs to fold a lot of clean laundry."
In your sentence it means,
"Someone needs to write a lot of mechanical work."
While this sentence is grammatically correct, it is meaningless since people do not write mechanical work -- that is, "mechanical work" cannot meaningfully be the direct object of "write".
I don't like the Merriam-Webster explanation that is given by another answer, because it is completely opaque even to me (a native speaker). All you need to know is that the phrase in question means:
there’s a lot of mechanical work { when it comes to / with respect to } writing.
Hence the gerund "writing" is needed, to form the noun phrase that is the object of the preposition "to".
"Writing" is a gerund, and it functions as the object of the preposition "to". Merriam-Webster gives the following definition of "to" (as used here):
used as a function word to indicate the application of an adjective or a noun
In this case, the noun phrase "a lot of mechanical work" is applied to "writing".
There are some implied words left out.
There's a lot of mechanical work to (the action of) writing.
Your way would be this.
There's a lot of mechanical work to (the action of) write.
And that's clearly wrong.
Heh. I don't know which of Hemingway's works it is in, but in one of them he talks about how wonderful it is to be able to make his living by writing. There's a passage about sitting with some paper and a pencil and scribbling up a new novel that supported his life. And he could do this nearly anywhere. So, in his case, there really was mechanical work. He had to drag this pencil across the paper to put each word on the page.
A gerund (-ing) form is required when a verb (action word) is functioning as a noun (a thing).
Even though "writing" sounds like an action, it is functioning grammatically as a noun (thing) -- an activity. Activities sound "active", but they are things.
I write at night. (action) I like writing (the activity).
He's using "writing" as a noun. It's the same structure as "there's a lot of injuries to soccer."