Split Infinitives: To Boldly Go Where No (Wo)Man Has Gone Before

I recognize that the above statement is cheesy, but hopefully you can catch on to the point. Perhaps it should be “To go boldly where no man has gone before,” but really, would it be as memorable? Split infinitives typically crop up in my writing—I am one to lean toward the wordy styles of English majors, and worse, the relaxed style of fiction students. In WRTC, however, it seems that split infinitives get me more often than not.

So, a little history regarding the split infinitive:

According to the American Heritage Book of English Usage on Split Infinitives, the first split infinitive appeared around the Norman conquest of Britain when the English was greatly influenced by the French language. The earliest split infinitives appeared around 1250, but interestingly enough, Shakespeare only used one in his career: “Thy pity may deserve to pitied be” (Sonnet 142)

Of course, in the 1900’s some grammarians chose to demonize split infinitives, though according to Joanne Asala at CompassRose.com, now the taboo can be helpful for clarification. This source also connects the negative viewpoint of split infinitives to the Renaissance writers who focused on Greek and Latin forms of speech. The format of Greek and Latin cannot include split infinitives due to the structure of sentences. It seems that people went back and forth on the subject, though note those famous individuals who used the split infinitives to their advantage: Abraham Lincoln, William Wordsworth, and Willa Cather. More recently, scholars seem to be split on this subject. (No Pun Intended)

This is what OWL says:

Split infinitives

Split infinitives occur when additional words are included between to and the verb in an infinitive. Many readers find a single adverb splitting the infinitive to be acceptable, but this practice should be avoided in formal writing.

Examples:

• I like to on a nice day walk in the woods. * (unacceptable)
  On a nice day, I like to walk in the woods. (revised)
• I needed to quickly gather my personal possessions. (acceptable in informal contexts)
  I needed to gather my personal possessions quickly. (revised for formal contexts)

Above all, here, I think it’s necessary to recognize the flexibility of language. It is an organic concept that moves with culture so that, if we ever do go back to Latin, we can move with the times. The chance of this happening is pretty slim, of course. I suppose we are more likely to talk in Javascript someday. But, there is something to say for style and the comforting nature of literature that is written in the way that we speak. Should we take this relaxed response in every piece we write? Probably not. Should we judge those who split their infinitives? Probably not, though we should probably instruct them to checkout OWL. Regardless of all of the notes on my papers, regardless of the reinforcement of this rule, I can’t help but note the fact that I seem to consistently revert back to what I am accustomed to.