"to let" or "letting"?

[guinevere]

[Conchita]

Yes, we can, Guinevere. In fact, the sentence sounds even better with 'letting', I'd say.

[Haihao]

Hi Conchita and Guinevere,

I am really interested in the example and I just wonder if there were any slight difference between 'to let' and 'letting' to be applied in the sentence.

Could it be possible that: "He cannot be a good father to let her go out alone in the dark." suggests "He cannot do such a thing, as a good father, to let her go out alone in the dark." while "He cannot be a good father letting her go out alone in the dark" implies "Letting her go out alone in the dark, he cannot be seen as a good father".

But I am not sure. May I have any or any other ideas on this?

Thank you!

Haihao

[lost_soul]

Well, I am not a native English speaker, but, as you asked for others' ideas, I think I should share mine

He cannot be a good father to let her go out alone in the dark -> She wants to go but he is not a good father and he does not let her go.
He cannot be a good father letting her go out alone in the dark -> He lets her go but if he were a good father, he wouldn't let her go.
_________________
Alex

A native speaker of Russian

[Tom]

Hi folks

If my common sense works duly, it is the same case as this. Please see:

Expression: "...come to help celebrate..."

...and much more detailed discussion here:

http://www.englishforums.com/English/ExpressionGivesStrengthFaceBusy-LiesAhead/vzxhc/Post.htm

Tom

[Yankee]

Hi Guinevere

I agree with Conchita that both are possible, and I also like 'letting' better.

The use of 'letting' would suggest more strongly to me that possibly 'he' often allows her to go out alone.

The use of 'to let' suggests to me that the speaker might be referring to only one specific instance in which 'he' allowed her to go out alone.

In both cases, the speaker feels that allowing her to go out alone in the dark is not something a good father would do.

---------------------------------------
Hi Tom

I'd say this is a bit different from the discussion in the other forum in that it involves the verb 'let' rather than 'come' or 'go' (i.e. 'to let' vs 'letting'). In the other forum, the discussion also involved the past participle and the omission of "who have/had". In the sentence here, the discussion is about the infinitive vs the present participle.
.
_________________
Amy
.
ESL teacher, translator, and a native speaker of American English

[Tom]

[Yankee]

[Yankee]

[Haihao]

Thank you all so very much for your opinions, which are all so beneficial to me.

But I still feel that Alex's "She wants to go but he is not a good father and he does not let her go." is another choice or possibility to explain the original sentence: He cannot (be a good father to let her go out alone in the dark) = He cannot become such a person as so called a good father who would allow her to go out alone in the dark.

Maybe I am very wrong but I am really still confused.

Haihao

[lost_soul]

[Yankee]

Hi Haihao

For the meaning that Alex mentioned (in his first post), I might possibly word the sentence this way:

He cannot be a good father and let her (do something she wants to do).

There is also the question of context. "Allow her to go out alone in the dark" is not something that would typically be thought of as better or safer than "not allow her to go out alone in the dark".
.
_________________
Amy
.
ESL teacher, translator, and a native speaker of American English

[Yankee]

[Conchita]

Bear in mind, too, that "can't" here is used as the negative of 'must' and has the sense of "it isn't probable/likely". E.g.: It must be the doctor/It can't be the doctor.

We could rephrase the sentence as: "I'm sure he isn't a good father, since he lets her go out alone in the dark".