WOW! That's very interesting. As a native English Speaker, I don't think we really are aware of such a distinction.Hello
Some do see a semantic distinction in omitting and adding “to” following help. One source that comes to mind is A Semantic Approach to English Grammar, by R.M.D. Nixon.
The idea is that the omission of “to” suggests a direct link between the main clause and the complement clause, so that in the activity is aimed at helping students put into practice, the activity directly helps students, as if it were a cooperative effort. By contrast, in …helping students to put into practice, “to” suggests an indirect link: the activity enabled or made it easy for the students to act. (Nixon uses as one example: John helped me write the letter vs. John helped me to write the letter.) However, it’s fair to say that in many cases there is no clear-cut distinction between a direct and an indirect link and the choice of adding or omitting “to” after help is purely stylistic.
Either way sounds fine to me. Can you cite any support for your position?I think that only the base form of a verb can follow "help." For example, if one is asking for assistance, only "Help me do this." is correct, and not "Help me to do this." Perhaps in the example being discussed, both sound correct to the ears; but, still only one is correct.
I agree - and I'd suggest that that's because no such distinction really exists.WOW! That's very interesting. As a native English Speaker, I don't think we really are aware of such a distinction.