2
This is my second question marked to be closed. If I knew the language very well, I wouldn't ask any questions here. I removed the original question. Let the moderators write the question here the way they want! 
16
  • 3
    to confirm and to inform are completely different verbs, so you should choose the one that matches your intended sense. But note that they couldn't have confirmed to the patient isn't idiomatic without explicitly specifying what is being confirmed: they couldn't have confirmed the diagnosis to the patient. Oct 18, 2023 at 15:54
  • I am aware that those are different verbs. Assume that ellipsis has been applied: confirmed [the disease] to the patient and informed the patient [about the disease]. Oct 18, 2023 at 16:07
  • 2
    I don't think either ellipsis sounds natural. Oct 18, 2023 at 16:21
  • I can't think of a time when I would use "confirmed" with the preposition "to." I would say "they couldn't have confirmed with the patient." Oct 18, 2023 at 16:25
  • 1
    @SouthIndianɪŋɡlɪʃɪfaɪd Great. I've added that info into your question. This other example you've suggested is much better because it makes logical sense. A problem with it though is that "stand up for" is a three-word phrasal verb, not an intransitive verb followed by a preposition. I've now answered your question.
    – gotube
    Oct 20, 2023 at 21:15

1 Answer 1

1

The grammar of your sentences 1 and 2 are correct and natural and have the same function. They're interchangeable.

The meaning of the sentences is a bit odd because if the patient already knows the information, you cannot inform them, and if they don't know it, you can't confirm with them.

But I understand your question clearly enough and hope I've answered it.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .