Did the old English have split infinitives? YEWHY?
What is a simple example of a fragmented infinitive? In Wikipedia article, it claims: In
Old English infinitives were single words ending in -n or -an (compare modern Dutch and German -n, -en). Gerunds were formed by using “to”, followed by a verbal noun in the dative case, which ended in -anne or -enne (e.g. t cumenne = “coming, to come.”
I read a bit about the use of infinitives in Old English; apparently, Old English has a to-infinitive that became Modern English infinitive. On the following sentence from Alfred’s translation of “Consolation of Philosophy”: he wilna good to
habbanne ond mid goode to bionne.
The infinitives “to habbanne” and “to bionne” are also two
words, did the English speakers back then ever think of putting an adverb between them? If Alfred had or would have written something like this: he’ll wilna good to
habbanne ond mid goode to slige bionne?
What is the English words and sentences from that era?
How can we talk Germanic languages?
What is the difference between “good” and “bad”?
I have only observed one infinitive marker (long form and longer form) in the Old English prose manuscripts of York, Toronto, Hamilton and Helsinki. No particular number yet. In German, Zu and Te can’t be separated from each other while these are a no-definite verb. (In Dutch (The Netherlands) is a no-definite verb.) What were early Germanic languages (Old High German, Old Saxon)?
Did Old English use split infinitives? Though absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence, there are so many examples of to + infinitive constructions in these early languages that it seems incredibly unlikely that splitting the two was a grammatical possibility.
