On the use of split infinitives in English

When to (not) split the infinitive: factors governing patterns of syntactic variation in Twitter-style Philippine English

“…The effects of Condition D on the likelihood to pre-modify ( pd = 1) or post-modify ( pd = 0.94) instead of splitting are highly probable based on the model. They are also consistent with the literature (Crystal 1984 The unexpected effects related to Conditions A and B in this study indicate that these conditions do indeed have influence on patterns of modified infinitive variation, but perhaps not to achieve 'natural' rhythm, as Calle-Martín & Miranda-García (2009) have argued. This is best supported by an examination of the interaction effect observed between Conditions B and D, which showed that users tend to avoid splitting infinitives in Condition B constructions if the adverb splitter contributes to 'natural' rhythm (table 2, figure 6c and d) ( pd pre = 1, pd post = 0.85)the opposite of what we would expect.…”

“…to BOLD-ly GO, U S-U S) compared to the other constructions (e.g. boldly to go, S-U U S; to go boldly, U S S-U), which contain a consecutive sequence of weak or strong syllables (Crystal 1984: 30;Calle-Martín & Miranda-García 2009). The tendency for split constructions to appear in constructions that are rhythmically 'natural' suggests that the split construction tends to be used if it contributes to the 'natural' rhythm (table 1, example for Condition D) and is avoided if the placement of the adverb in between the to-phrase (adverb before the verb) disrupts it.…”

The English split infinitive: A comparative study of learner corpora

“…Such real use of split infinitives in the learner corpora presented in the current study, as well as in native-speaker corpora (e.g. Albakry, 2005;Calle-Martin & Miranda-Garcia, 2009;Carter & McCarthy, 2006;Mikulova, 2011;Mitrasca, 2009;Stageberg & Oaks, 2000), may suggest that a condemnation of infinitive splitting is an outdated English grammar rule. Although the split infinitive largely occurs in spoken English, there is likelihood that it will be used and accepted more widely in written English in almost all varieties of English (Stageberg & Oaks, 2000, p. 333).…”

“…Nonetheless, my view is that split infinitives may and should be used only on the condition that its avoidance can make the message to be communicated ambiguous or obscure. As explained earlier, the split infinitive is capable of disambiguation (Calle-Martin & Miranda-Garcia, 2009;Gowers, 1954). Moreover, the split infinitive is obviously permissible provided that writers' purpose is to add more attractiveness and excitement to their language, such as in the Star Trek blurb, previously discussed (Copperud, 1964;Crystal, 2003).…”