Alexander Koryagin to Anton Shepelev:

AK>>> When  a  person  is  in  a company of friends he never
AK>>> speaks formally.  And he should  not  to.  It  is  too
AK>>> loathsome, IMHO.
AS>> Correction:  "should  not" or "ought not to" (depending
AS>> on what you mean).
AK> Is it true, Ardith? Can I replace "speak" for "to"?

My answer is no, you cannot replace "speak" with  "to",  nor
substitute  "to"  for "speak", because one is a verb and the
other a preposition.  You can,  however,  replace  one  verb
with another, e.g.:

            I love you better than I do myself.

AK> Languages follow people, not textbooks. Textbooks follow
AK> languages. ;-)

It is not so simple.  In order to  improve  a  program,  you
must first acquire a thorough understanding of its structure
and working.  The same with language.   Good  books -- among
which  I  rank  Goold Brown's "Grammar of English Grammars",
Fowler's "King's  English",  and  even  Emerson's  essay  on
language -- enhance our command of language and thus give us
both the power and right  to  improve  it.  The  destiny  of
language  shall  not  be left at the mercy of the illitirate
and the careless.

AK> As for the article I have  already  discussed  here  the
AK> similar  case,  when  one prince returned home "smelling
AK> like horse". In other words, English is not very strict.
AK> 

Not at all, and Dallas Hinton explained it well that in this
phrase `horse' is uncountable becauase denotes a  substance.
In  Shakespeare,  however,  `snail'  certainly refers to the
whole individual animal.  Observe that Americans  use  `pie'
uncountably, too, e.g.: "We had tea and apple pie".

---
 * Origin: nntps://fidonews.mine.nu - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/6.0)