The Split Infinitive

"i'll surely be" is considered to be grammatically correct (the 'i' in 'i'll' should be capitalized, but thats neither here nor there). I will surely be, by the same token, is also correct. Yet the simple 'to surely be' is attacked by some to be an awful grammaticaly mistake. Why? Because it is a split-infinitive. The dread split-infinitive.

The history of the split-infinitive is quite simple. We can the Romans credit for this one. You see, in Latin (and all other Romance languages) the infinitive form of a verb is one word instead of two. But English, not being a Romance language is different, and so when some 'brilliant' grammar stuck Latin grammar onto the English language, we were left with a dilemma. To split or not to split.

One of English's endearing and advantageous traits is its remarkable versatility, the ability to put words in a sentance in almost any order we please, which is not the case in most other languages. One would think that the infinitive would be no different. It is, afterall, two words (after all is as well). But for some reason, the split-infinitive was given special persecution by the powers that be.

Now-a-days, most respectable grammarians say that it is perfectly alright to split an infinitive. One even says that it isn't technically possible to split an infinitve anyway (you wouldn't say that 'the blue box' was a split nominative). The people that do hold on to this arcane belief are the sort of people that, in their own words, are 'always right'. However, I really am always right, which makes them wrong. And that will surely be proven correct.