A very basic question that I should not ask but I ask anyway :)

Why we say "To be verbs" when it is actually "an infinitive". I think if it was a verb, then it mustn't have forms such as (am, is, are). This must actually be an infinitive with the base verb "be" and other forms based on different tenses.
I mean we should say "be" verb instead of "to be" verbs. Also, if "to be" was a verb, it's meaning should be similar based on each subject.

Take the example of "to walk". We say it's an infinitive with "walk" as a base verb. And the meaning of "walk" is intact based on the subjects. But, for "to be" it seems it is reverse.

Question

A very basic question that I should not ask but I ask anyway :)

Why we say "To be verbs" when it is actually "an infinitive". I think if it was a verb, then it mustn't have forms such as (am, is, are). This must actually be an infinitive with the base verb "be" and other forms based on different tenses.
I mean we should say "be" verb instead of "to be" verbs. Also, if "to be" was a verb, it's meaning should be similar based on each subject.

Take the example of "to walk". We say it's an infinitive with "walk" as a base verb. And the meaning of "walk" is intact based on the subjects. But, for "to be" it seems it is reverse.

Answer

I don't understand the question.

Answer

because you never use "to must", "to can", "to should" etc.

Answer

It is still a verb, it's just that this one is irregular, which happens to many verbs in English.

Answer

This is an interesting question.
I had not thought about this before.

"To be" does change forms more than other verbs.

"am / is / are" compared to "walk / walks" or "eat / eats."

I don't know why, but it is interesting to think about.
Good luck!

Risposte · 4

Non hai ancora trovato le tue risposte?

Non perdere l'opportunità di imparare una lingua comodamente da casa tua. Esplora la nostra selezione di insegnanti di lingue esperti e iscriviti subito alla tua prima lezione!