Hi, According to one of the dictionaries I own, "dedicated to" cannot be followed by the original form of a verb; it must be followed by a noun, pronoun, or gerund, because "to" here is not a to-infinitive. However, I came across so many sentences using "dedicated to be" and "dedicated to do"...
Hey all, is there any difference between the meaning of these two sentences: 1. ASUS has been dedicated on research and development 2.ASUS has been dedicated to research and development Normally we use ‘dedicated to’ more correct?
I am dedicated to +Ving As I know this is the correct form. " I am dedicated to taking care of him." But google shows more results with this form "dedicated to take care" Maybe I am worng about " dedicated+ Ving" ? What do you say ?
My wife is a dedicated/devoted mother. I presume both dedicated and devoted fit here, but I could never tell the different meanings between them. Are they really different? Thanks.
The former was more common, but only by about a margin of 3 to 2. ("Dedicated to preserve," on the other hand, was definitely a minority choice, cited 40 times less than "dedicated to preserving.") So Mazbook is right that there is precedent for "committed to provide," though it still wouldn't be my choice.
Dedicated to maintain can be interpreted as a contraction of dedicated in order to maintain, while dedicated to maintaining has only one interpretation.
Is "dedicated" a good match with "public use"? As in: "This room has been dedicated by the hospital to public use." It sounds a bit stilted to me. I'd expect something more like: "This room has been provided by the hospital for public use".
Is it correct to say that an argument is dealt with in more details in a 'dedicated section' or maybe 'dedicated paragraph' (since it is part of the same article)? gracias
