Finers Stephens Innocent and Howard Kennedy agree terms for £45m merger By Sam Chadderton 8 August 2012 16:16 17 December 2015 12:36 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer Anon 9 August 2012 at 12:38 Game changer. Reply Link Stephen 9 August 2012 at 12:54 @ Anon | 9-Aug-2012 12:38 pm – For the west end market maybe but it’s hardly as if Linklaters and Skadden have just announced they are going to merge. Reply Link Kelsey Grammar 9 August 2012 at 13:20 ‘Can exclusively reveal’ is a split infinitive. Wouldn’t find THAT in The Economist… Reply Link Economies of scale? 9 August 2012 at 14:07 Two struggling firms get together to create a bigger struggling firm. Good luck to the fee earners they will make redundant. Reply Link RT 9 August 2012 at 15:14 Kelsey Grammar | 9-Aug-2012 1:20 pm ‘Can exclusively reveal’ is a split infinitive. Wouldn’t find THAT in The Economist… Perhaps, but The Economist is an awful uber-right wing rag that would happily become Mitt Romney’s gimp. I’d rather have a free press and a few errors and than that buttoned up piece of cr*p. Re, the merger, has Assange paid his legal bills yet? Reply Link Anonymous 10 August 2012 at 08:52 ‘Can exclusively reveal’ is not a split infinitive. Reply Link Anonymous 10 August 2012 at 09:11 I’d dispute that “can exclusively reveal” is a split infinitive. “To exclusively reveal” would be. There’s nothing wrong with a split infinitive anyway. Read your Fowler’s. Reply Link Pedantry 10 August 2012 at 09:50 Give the pedant a t-shirt Reply Link Anonymous 10 August 2012 at 10:04 Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the origin of the split infinitive rule in English is that fact that you can’t do it in Latin – Latin infinitives are one word so are unsplittable. English grammarians wanted to make the language more like a classical one. The verb ‘to be able to’, however, takes an additional verb in the infinitive in Latin (e.g. possum + infinitive), so the “can” and the non-finite verb are 2 separate words. Granted, maybe in Latin these are always placed together (I don’t know), but this is not the point of the split infinitive rule – the point is that Latin infinitives are one word. There does not appear to be any reason why “can + verb” cannot be split in English. Now go back to avidly reading the Economist. Reply Link Oxford English Professor 10 August 2012 at 10:44 Can is a modal verb and as such it does not have an ‘infinitive’, in which case one cannot split an infinitive phrase with ‘can’ or ‘could’. Even if it were possible to spilt a modal verb phrase, splitting infinitives is not ‘grammatically’ incorrect, it is merely a matter of style. If The Economist sticks to that way of writing that is fine, however, Kelsey Grammar will find that every other major newspaper writing in English uses the phrase ‘We can exclusively reveal’ including the Times and the Telegraph. Reply Link Pete 10 August 2012 at 11:15 So two unattractive spinsters move in together through fear of dying alone. Is this really news? Reply Link Classical Colin 10 August 2012 at 11:17 Yes, the pedant likes to kick the Lawyer. Credit to the Lawyer for indulging the pedant. A sad, sad case. Reply Link Anonymous 13 September 2012 at 11:34 It will be interesting to see the redundancies that are inevitably going to take place, both have failing non profitable areas of their business (especially HK) and those who seem to wield the ‘Power Stick’ whenever they like may find themselves trying to cling on to their jobs Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.