"To the death" is used as an idiom with verbs and nouns meaning "fight"
We shall fight to the death
A battle to the death
We will defend the castle to the death.
It means "until one party is dead" although it may be used figuratively. The expression can also occur in non idiomatic situations: "protesters reacted to the death of the man"
"To death" can ...
To cook something on something: They cooked fish on a grill.
To sit on something: He sat on a chair.
To be sat on: The chair is designed to be sat on.
To be cooked on: The grill is designed to be cooked on.
Why are you scraping off loose paint with a dinner fork? A dinner fork is meant to be eaten with.
I would like to be in the school play, but I ...
First, I have read this book and 'bend down his head' is meant literally. Calcifer is a living fire who can be used as a stove, but only if he puts his head in the right position first.
Second, the phrase "He won't bend down his head to be cooked on."
When we cook using a fire or stove or similar, we say that we cook on it rather than with it.
This is a very common mistake!
So, don't worry. Here is the cure.
Ask yourself which one makes more sense: "look forward to it" or "look forward to do it"?
Chances are you know that "look forward to it" sounds more natural, because you've seen or you've heard others use it that way before. And, yes, with look forward to, you need hearing from you (NOT hear ...
A very good question!
OALD says that both are idioms!
to death (without the article) means extremely, very much.
But when you add the article...
to the death it means until you 'die'
That's the reason, when you say starve to death, it means you are famished
But defend/fighting to the death means don't give up until you die!
"Be to", oddly enough, means that you have been directed or destined to do something by someone else.
I can't. My mother says I am to clean my room.
I am to go to London in a fortnight and report to the major.
Whereas there can be almost any source of obligation in "have to":
I have to study if I want to pass.
I have to use the washroom.
The difference is subtle, but important.
Two quick translations...
Do you start work at 7 or half past seven?
Do you usually get to your place of work at 7 or 7.30?
Do you start to work at 7 or half past seven?
At whatever time you actually arrive there, do you actually commence doing that job at 7 or 7.30.
As it would be fairly rude to question ...
"Look forward to" is a phrasal verb, in which "to" is a preposition; it is a part of the phrase, not the part of the infinitive hear. So it takes a noun or the -ing form of a verb, even you use the phrase in the progressive form. So your first sentence is OK grammatically, but the second one isn't. It should be:
I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Unquestionably, OP's first example is "standard/correct" for what I assume is the intended meaning (finishing this work is something that's impossible for me to do myself).
But that's not inherent in the context of constructions involving impossible [preposition] me and an activity expressed using an infinitive form. Consider, for example,...
1: It seems ...
When using the verb "help," you can use either a to-infinitive or a bare infinitive without affecting the meaning or the grammaticality of the sentence. The bare infinitive version is more common especially in American English.
"[...]the better practice is to use a bare infinitive after help (if the choice is between a fully expressed infinitive [with to] ...
I'm not familiar with the book, but clearly the fire-demon is a source of heat; and is not consenting to be used in this way by just anyone; presumably the mechanism of deriving heat involves him bending his head down (to a height suitable for cooking) and the frying pan goes on top... So the fire-demon is not the subject of the cooking, but the source. The ...
What is involved here is the lexical aspect† of the verb meet.
Meet in this sense has a specific sort of time structure 'built in' to its meaning. It's what we call an "achievement" verb: it designates a point in time at which a goal—a change of state—occurs. There may be a more or less extended period during which you are working toward ...
....and we [can [use them [to help you [buy the best product]]]].
No, you've got the analysis mostly wrong.
This is a complex catenative construction with a number of catenative verbs, two intervening nouns as objects, and two catenative complement clauses.
"Can" is a catenative verb and the non-finite clause "use them to help you buy the best product" ...
Somehow, using 'preposition' with the word 'work' here does not convince me. The sole reason for that is 'work' here serves as a noun. So, to + nounis NO.
If I am asked to speak it naturally, I may prefer asking...
Do you start working at .... or Do you start your work at ....
Others may come up with their answers. This is a good question.
In English, modal verbs such as CAN, WILL, the verbs MAKE, LET and also verbs of perception, for example SEE, FEEL or HEAR take verbs in the plain form. These verbs appear without the word to. For this reason:
*You make me to cry (ungrammatical)
... is badly formed. It's ungrammatical. We need the plain form of CRY without the word to:
You make me cry.
You could say:
In this regard, two hypotheses were picked for study.
When you write:
In this regard, two hypotheses were picked to study.
I am expecting an object for "study", which might not refer to your hypotheses. For example:
In this regard, two hypotheses were picked to study how Santa delivers all those presents.
Making the verb ...
Usually there is no significant difference in meaning between these non-finite verbs. That said, they can often be used to impart differing degrees of specificity.
One potentially helpful way of distinguishing between gerunds and infinitives is to remember that a gerund usually indicates something more general while an infinitive usually indicates ...
The verb answer is normally used either without any Complements, or with a Direct Object:
"Yes", she answered. (no Complement)
Answer the question. (with Direct Object, the question)
I answered him. (with Direct Object him)
Answer the phone. (with Direct Object phone)
When answer means to respond as in the sentences above, it does not take preposition ...
There is no difference in meaning between to-infinitives and bare infinitives. The use of one form or the other is generally determined by the verb controlling the infinitive clause.
Typical examples of a verb requiring the use of a to-infinitive are:
I want to go home.
I need to go home.
Other verbs admit both to-infinitives or bare infinitives, e.g.:...
There are three interlocking pieces here.
One of them is a ‘fossil’ construction which has hung around for centuries: a marked infinitive (to VERB) employed as a modifier signifying that the noun it modifies can be or should be VERBed. As a direct attributive it is placed after the noun:
a job to do
a race to run
a mountain to climb
Thus, although ...
You understand this correctly.
This fullest form of this comparative construction is
too ADJECTIVE [for SUBJECT to VERB COMPLEMENTS]
The piece in square brackets  is what we call an infinitival clause: it has its own SUBJECT, VERB and COMPLEMENTS, with VERB cast in the infinitive (to VERB).
SUBJ VERBinf COMPL
[for me to take out ]
I don't think there's much of a difference at all, since both forms are capable of expressing both an achieved state and an ongoing sense. One could say they differ only in which of those two senses is primary.
"I like to be painted green" said the house.
The house likes to have green paint on it. The house likes it when the painters are painting it green....
To me (a non-native user) the second sentence in the form I must not do that sounds correct, the first version is incorrect.
But I want you to clarify what you want to say.
If you want to negate an obligation to do something, then you should say I don't have to do that or I don't need to do that. The meaning is then that you are not required to do ...
I believe this is a case of the "zero infinitive".
Essentially, either usage is correct, though there may be a preference for the zero infinitive case ("The first thing you need to do is trim vegetables"). Using the to-infinitive case ("The first thing you need to do is to trim the vegetables") tends to sound unnecessarily formal.
As Cambridge dictionary says:
We use help with an object and an infinitive with or without to:
Jack is helping me to tidy my CDs. or Jack is helping me tidy my CDs.
Both “help someone do something” and “help someone to do something” are acceptable. The form without “to” seems to be more common in everyday speech than the form with “to” (especially in ...
1) The best way to destroy your enemy is to make him a friend.
2) The best way to destroy your enemy is by making him a friend.
The first sentence sets up a relationship between the first and second part.
The best way to do something = make x something.
The "to" is a function word that allows the two parts to relate to each other. It connects the two ...
Them is the direct object of the verb 'use'. To help you (to) buy the best product is a non-finite clause functioning as a 'catenative complement'. This catenative complement is licensed (allowed) by the catenative verb 'use'.
Direct objects normally answer the question 'what'.* But To help you (to) buy the best product clearly does not answer the question ...
I have to disagree with most of the answers on this page with the exception of Maulik's use of working and start your work. "Start to work" is ambiguous and can be interpreted as when someone begins travelling toward their workplace.
I get up in the morning, get in the car, and start to work. I arrive there in about 20 minutes.
Probably a regional thing ...
The structure you define 'For....to be considered' is a conditional structure which means you are defining the attributes that that thing must have to be considered something.
Now you want to remove for.... That's okay but then to retain the 'conditionality*, you'll have to introduce the conjunction for it -'if'.
For a laptop to be ...