[mallumowgli]

I've seen or rather heard many people using 'can't able to' in sentences (especially in Chennai). In fact we had a professor who used to repeatedly say this and we had made it into a sort of fun phrase - instead of saying 'No, Sorry', we say ' can't able to' . This is a totally wrong usage. If you can't, you can't. There is nothing to be able to beyond that.

The correct usage is "He is not able to finish the work on time" or "He can't jump over the fence"

Another fairly frequently seen usage is instead of 'Do you...' people use 'Are you...'

So instead of "Do you like ice cream" some ask "Are you like ice-cream". The answer would be "Dont you dare!"

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

I've seen or rather heard many people using 'can't able to' in sentences (especially in Chennai). !"

Relax buddy, it is not confined to Chennai alone----that usage is widely prevalent in Vizag too!!

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by vnabhi

Relax buddy, it is not confined to Chennai alone----that usage is widely prevalent in Vizag too!!

Hehe, why keep it limited to the east?! We have it here in Delhi too.
Bad English is everywhere! Can't get away from it!

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by Delta Wing

I read somewhere that 'ought' without 'to' could be used too, as in-

"Ought we visit them in such times of..."

I also remember usage of 'ought not' without 'to', as in-

"My child, you ought not commit a sin" or "I ought not have drunk so much"

Your views please?

I think I'll say that all 3 of your examples sound rather incorrect.

My child, you ought not to commit a sin. (Though that sounds plain weird)

We ought to visit them in such times of...

I ought not to drink so much.

You simply cannot use ought without to. You cannot - it would be incorrect. If you have read otherwise, please share it here.

[tacho]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I think I'll say that all 3 of your examples sound rather incorrect.

My child, you ought not to commit a sin. (Though that sounds plain weird)

We ought to visit them in such times of...

I ought not to drink so much.

You simply cannot use ought without to. You cannot - it would be incorrect. If you have read otherwise, please share it here.

I have no clue about ought. But I googled 'ought without to' after reading your post and this is the first result ENGLISH PAGE - Ought to

[Thad E Ginathom]

... I'm with Sam on "ought not to".

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

You simply cannot use ought without to. You cannot - it would be incorrect. If you have read otherwise, please share it here.

Originally Posted by tacho

I have no clue about ought. But I googled 'ought without to' after reading your post and this is the first result ENGLISH PAGE - Ought to

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

... I'm with Sam on "ought not to".

An interesting debate - after a long time. I read that page and you know what, I am not convinced.

Mark ought not drink so much sounds completely wrong to my ears.

We need more brains. More opinions.

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

... I'm with Sam on "ought not to".

Me too. An 'ought' that is not followed by a 'to' tantamounts to improper English.

[anupmathur]

Anecdotal evidence here that 'ought' may be used without the 'to':

....
I am of the opinion that the Church, which is the Body of Christ, ought not be divided, but focused on what we hold in common. Each Christian should seek the counsel of their church and their Bible, aligning all things with the Scripture.
....

Source: Christian issues: does God want me to handle snakes?

To my ears it sounds acceptable.
I'd rather you'd accept it too.

[mallumowgli]

Personally i've seen 'ought not' than 'ought not to'. It is only for positive the 'ought to' is used. Mostly when the 'not' comes in the 'to' disappears. I dont know the rules for this. Give me a day or two, though, and I can give more references.

[rsjaurr]

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

Another fairly frequently seen usage is instead of 'Do you...' people use 'Are you...'

So instead of "Do you like ice cream" some ask "Are you like ice-cream". The answer would be "Dont you dare!"

So if i have to ask someone (An American) his identity should i be saying "Do You American?" rather than "Are you American?"

[vivekiny2k]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

An interesting debate - after a long time. I read that page and you know what, I am not convinced.

Mark ought not drink so much sounds completely wrong to my ears.

We need more brains. More opinions.

Mark ought not be drinking drink so much sounds convincing to me.

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

Mark ought not be drinking drink so much sounds convincing to me.

Without the 'to' it sounds most unconvincing to me!
Mark ought not to be drinking so much sounds right.

Why the 'drink' in your sentence above?

[vivekiny2k]

Originally Posted by anupmathur

Without the 'to' it sounds most unconvincing to me!
Mark ought not to be drinking so much sounds right.

Why the 'drink' in your sentence above?

oops, i wrote what I thought was right and forgot to erase what was already there. although Mark could be drinking a drink

I meant Mark ought not be drinking so much.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by vnabhi

Me too. An 'ought' that is not followed by a 'to' tantamounts to improper English.

This sent me scurrying to look stuff up! I discovered that tantamount is a verb, although I thought it was not. However, usual usage would be to say is tantamount to. This is the first time I have ever come across it used as a verb