Here’s an interesting grammar question raised sometime ago by India-based Forum member Jhumur Dasgupta:
“I frequently come across sentence structures that use the form ‘is to’/‘are to’ as in the following example: ‘Four of Greece’s leading banks
are to receive a $23 billion capital injection to replenish reserves that were hit by the country’s massive debt restructuring deal.’
“I prefer not using these structures as I don’t have much clue about them; instead, I opt to use ‘will’ structures. Can you please explain in detail the usefulness of ‘is to’/‘are to’ structures and when to use them?”
Here’s my reply to Jhumur:In formal English, the “is to”/“are to” grammatical structure is often used to state officially mandated arrangements, plans, or regulations. When in the present tense, this form evokes the sense of a definite expectation that the action or activity referred to will be undertaken or will take place in the near future, as in the sentence you presented as an example.
Such sentences that use “is to” or “are to” in tandem with the base form of the verb—“receive” in the particular sentence you presented—convey the idea of a very strong certainty. This is in contrast to the simply futurity of the expected action in sentences using the usual future-tense structure “will receive,” as in the following construction:
“Four of Greece’s leading banks
will receive a $23 billion capital injection to replenish reserves that were hit by the country’s massive debt restructuring deal.”
We can see that when the simple future-tense form “will receive” is used, the element of the mandate to make the action happen is absent. The statement also doesn’t convey the strong certainty evoked by the sentence using the “are to receive” form.
When the “is to”/“are to” structure is in the past-tense form “was to”/“were to” and is followed by the base form of the verb, their combination forms the so-called
perfect infinitive tense. This tense describes a planned action or activity that didn’t take place for a stated reason, as in the following hypothetical variation of the sentence you presented:
“Four of Greece’s leading banks
were to receive a $23 billion capital injection to replenish reserves that were hit by the country’s massive debt restructuring deal, but the plan was aborted due to strong opposition by the general public.”
The “is to”/“are to” grammatical structure also finds common use in either issuing or acknowledging instructions or orders, as in the following examples:
Issuing an order: “You
are to report to work at exactly 8:30 a.m. Mondays to Fridays.”
Acknowledging an order: “We
are to report to work at exactly 8:30 a.m. Mondays to Fridays.”
Note that the aspect of compulsion to do the stated action is markedly absent, or at most weak, when the simple future tense is used:
At best an expectation: “You
will report to work at exactly 8:30 a.m. Mondays to Fridays.”
At best a promise: “We
will report to work at exactly 8:30 a.m. Mondays to Fridays.”
***
And here’s another interesting sentence construction question, this time from Tanzania-based Forum member Mwita Chacha:
“How can I avoid placing two ‘that’s’—the first a demonstrative pronoun and the other a relative pronoun—in this sentence: ‘That is the car that was stolen from Angel’s backyard last week.’ I’m worried that the sentence sounds boringly repetitive, and I’m afraid of risking breaching a grammar rule—at least an American English standard grammar rule—if I decide to replace the second ‘that’ with ‘which.’”
Here’s my reply to Mwita:Try this elliptical construction that contracts “that is” and then knocks off the relative pronoun “that”: “That’s the car stolen from Angel’s backyard last week.”
I think you’ll agree with me that it’s not only neater but also nicely conversational.
This essay, 801st in the series, first appeared in the column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in the July 28, 2012 issue of The Manila Times
, © 2012 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.
