>Do we all agree with Geoffrey Pullum (I do):
>
>http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=100#more-100
I do.
"...to increase dramatically learning opportunities for
Harvard undergraduates..."
"dramatically" needs to be moved to avoid confusion over what it
qualifies, unless a small word is inserted:
"...to increase dramatically the learning opportunities for
Harvard undergraduates..."
I'm not suggesting this as a preferred solution.

Signature
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Robert Lieblich - 30 Apr 2008 00:28 GMT
> >Do we all agree with Geoffrey Pullum (I do):
> >
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> I'm not suggesting this as a preferred solution.
Pullum lays it on quite thick in his LL posting, but he's right: there
is no sanction for barring the "split infinitive." I suppose there's
nothing wrong with writing around one -- if you don't make things
worse, that is. It's like Shaw never[1] starting a sentence with
"and." As long as you can write well enough to indulge your crotchets
without being caught in the act, all is well. But when you write
things like the phrase quoted from the Harvard announcement you
deserve all the scorn Pullum can heap on you.
[1] I know, I know -- never say never. So let me say instead that
I've never found a sentence-opening "and" in GBS. And I've been
looking.

Signature
Bob Lieblich, AmEclectic
Intentional tourist