fundamental to

Kiuhnm

6 days ago

Please have a look at the following sentences: 1. They lacked something fundamental to be truly happy. 2. They lacked something fundamental to being truly happy. I think they're both acceptable as the "to" in the first sentence can be replaced with "in order to" and the one in the second sentence is a preposition associated with "fundamental". What do you think and which one comes more naturally to you? EDIT: On second thought, the second one is better. "In order to" suggests something deliberate to reach a certain goal, I think, so it's not appropriate in this context. That doesn't mean that "to be" doesn't work, though.

5 comments

MikasaMinerva•6 days ago

I agree (but I'm not a native) They have different nuances, technically different meanings in my opinion, exactly as you described In one sentence "fundamental to be" can be replaced with "fundamental in order to be", in the other with "fundamental to being" can be replaced with "that is fundamental for being"

Th3MiteeyLambo•6 days ago

I’m a native speaker, I think both of these sentences are a little awkward 2 moreso than 1 but still

PharaohAce•6 days ago

If the first one means 'in order to', then it suggests that being truly happy is caused by the lacking: they did a) in order to b). In the second sentence, 'something fundamental to being truly happy' is the object of the lacking.

iamcarlgauss•6 days ago

It's just a noun vs. a verb, which comes up all the time (e.g. "I like swimming" and "I like to swim" mean the same thing). The confusion arises because "fundamental" takes the preposition "to". It may be helpful to replace "to" with "for", which works just as well (though it sounds a little odd). Don't think of "to" in \#1 as a preposition. It's not a preposition, it's part of an infinitive. "Fundamental \[for/to (preposition)\] \[being happy (noun phrase using a gerund)\]" and "fundamental \[to be (infinitive verb)\] happy". You can see the difference more clearly if you make totally separate constructions, like "fundamental to/for success" compared to "fundamental to succeed".

Agreeable-Fee6850•6 days ago

You have two sentences constructed in different ways. Personally, I would prefer the second sentence. This is an example of complex transitive complementation. The verb ‘lack’ has a direct object - ‘to lack something’ In this sentence, you are adding a complement to this direct object (to be happy). This is ‘noun phrase as a direct object’ + ‘adjective + complement’. Sentence 1: They lacked something fundamental to be happy. Main clause: They (subject) lacked (verb) something (object) fundamental (adjective - modifies ‘something’ in predicative position). to be happy (complement of something). I don’t think this sentence is grammatical because ‘something’ has two complements - They lacked something fundamental. They lacked something to be happy. If I wanted to make the sentence in this way, I would use a subordinate result clause: ‘They lacked something fundamental so they couldn’t be happy. I think you need the preposition ‘to’ to add the second complement (‘be happy’), to the adjective fundamental. (Fundamental to what? - to being happy.) Sentence 2: They lacked something fundamental to being happy. They (subject) lacked (verb) something fundamental to being happy. (Object - noun phrase) Object noun phrase: something (head noun) [which was] fundamental (reduced relative clause) to (preposition) being happy (gerund, complement of fundamental {not something}).