The other day I was reading Language Log, and discovered an interesting wording: "To be spared something is to not have it." This was said in the context of pointing out some interesting things about the expression "Everyone, from screenwriters to studio execs, are spared no mercy" (3/26/07, in "Everyone are spared no mercy"). I thought it ironic that G. K. Pullum would use a split infinitive, even though he has a penchant for criticising pedantry. My excitement subsided as I noticed a post from S. Thomason on 2/6/07, with which Pullum probably agrees (let's assume for the moment):
Thirty years ago, my writing handout told students to avoid split infinitives; but I deleted that charmingly nutty bit of prescriptivism from the handout when it became clear that it is now dead (in the sense that almost everyone who still objects to split infinitives is now too doddery to be making hiring, admissions, or major purchasing decisions).
(A Place for Prescriptivism in Linguists' Lives)
Is criticism of split infinitives now dead? I had a prof. point mine out to me. I point out split infinitives to my students (though I do not count off for them). Should I? I suppose I am not too young to one day find myself on a search committee, in which case I could reach a verdict based upon a candidate's use of infinitives (all else being equal). Is there common ground here? Is criticising them now going boldly where many have gone before? Or is it not letting go? Though I doubt splitting one's infinitives would raise a red flag at interviews for jobs requiring nothing but a G.E.D., might it do so for jobs requiring a Ph.D.? I'm really on the fence about this one. A good argument might move me. Takers?
