All you have to do is buy/to buy a car

R

roniy

Senior Member
Brooklyn NY
ISRAEL: Fluent Hebrew ( Speak Russian, Learning English)
Due to a thread I have just seen in the forum I wanted to ask a qeustion:
"All you have to do is buy/to buy a car"
Does it make any difference if we write the sentence either with to or without.

Thanks.
 
    • roniy said:
    Due to a thread I have just seen in the forum I wanted to ask a question:
    "All you have to do is buy/to buy a car"
    Does it make any difference if we you write the sentence either with to or without. (Impersonal third person plural in Hebrew translates informally as "you", and more formally as "one" or as the passive mood.)

    Thanks.
    Click to expand...

    To me it seems better without "to". "All you have to do is buy a car."
    -Jonathan.
     
    "All you have to do is buy a car" (to buy is ok here, but it sounds better to my ear without it).
    "You just/only/merely need to buy a car"
    "All you need is to buy a car"
    "All you need is a car"
    "All you require is a car"
     
    Hi friends:

    I’d really appreciate if someone supports my comprehension about this topic, related also with this thread.

    This paragraph available online (http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-09-26-voa54.cfm) has been taken literally from its original text:

    The financial crisis grows out of problems with mortgages, which are loans from a bank that helps a borrower to buy a home.

    My doubt is related to the way as verb “to buy” is used in this context, because I’ve heard several times its respective podcast and it seems as if the speaker says either “buy a home” or “buying home” instead of “to buy a”.

    Are all of them right options in this case or just the first one?

    Regards,
     
    In that case, you can either say, The financial crisis grows out of problems with mortgages, which are loans from a bank that help_ a borrower to buy a home.

    (I took the 's' from 'helps' because, in my understanding of the sentence, the loans, and not the bank, help a borrower to buy a home. Therefore the verb must agree with "loans" not with "bank". It should therefore be "loans help.")

    OR you can say,

    The financial crisis grows out of problems with mortgages, which are loans from a bank that help a borrower buy a home.

    Either sentence would be used in everyday speech, but the first sentence is slightly more formal with the use of the word 'to' before 'buy'.
     
    roniy said:
    Due to a thread I have just seen in the forum I wanted to ask a qeustion:
    "All you have to do is buy/to buy a car"
    Does it make any difference if we write the sentence either with to or without.

    Thanks.
    Click to expand...

    I would not say, "All you have to do is to buy a car" because that looks like the infinitive form of the verb is being overused. "To do" is already present so why do you "to buy" as well?

    "All you have to do is buy car" is much better.
     
    Nymeria said:
    In that case, you can either say, The financial crisis grows out of problems with mortgages, which are loans from a bank that help_ a borrower to buy a home.

    (I took the 's' from 'helps' because, in my understanding of the sentence, the loans, and not the bank, help a borrower to buy a home. Therefore the verb must agree with "loans" not with "bank". It should therefore be "loans help.")

    OR you can say,

    The financial crisis grows out of problems with mortgages, which are loans from a bank that help a borrower buy a home.

    Either sentence would be used in everyday speech, but the first sentence is slightly more formal with the use of the word 'to' before 'buy'.
    Click to expand...

    Thanks a lof my friend. It's a simple and precise answer.

    Regards,
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top