Preclude Someone From Doing vs. Preclude Someone To Do
Cambridge directly documents preclude + person + from + -ing as the action-prevention construction. Preclude also occurs with noun phrases and possibility expressions, but the cited evidence does not support person + to-infinitive as an equivalent.
ReviewedEvidence1 sourceSectionEnglish Usage
Quick answer
Use “preclude someone from doing something” for the documented prevention construction; do not use “preclude someone to do” as its equivalent.
Key details
Confusion Familygrammar-and-usage distinction
Rule Familypreposition and verb-complement pattern
TermsPreclude Someone From Doing, Preclude Someone To Do
Further guidance
Boundary
Preclude can also take a noun phrase or expressions such as “preclude the possibility”; those patterns do not create a person + to-infinitive complement.
Construction
Cambridge directly records “preclude someone from doing something” for preventing a person from an action.
Decision
Use “preclude someone from doing something” for the documented prevention construction; do not use “preclude someone to do” as its equivalent.
Sources and evidence
Sources are shown with the role they play in this guide. Historical or style-sensitive claims are kept within the evidence boundary described above.
Cambridge records “accuse someone of something” and specifically “accuse someone of doing something.” That supports of + -ing when the action is the alleged wrongdoing.
Cambridge records accustomed to something and gives -ing examples such as being accustomed to working or being treated in a particular way. Do not interpret the “to” after accustomed as an infinitive marker in this construction.
Cambridge distinguishes adapt to a situation or activity from transitive patterns such as adapting plans to fit new circumstances. The surface sequence “adapt … to + verb” therefore needs its grammatical structure identified before choosing an -ing form or infinitive.
Cambridge distinguishes “apologize to someone” from “apologize for something/doing something.” You can combine the two roles, as in “apologize to someone for doing something”; “to” marks the recipient while “for” marks the reason.
Cambridge distinguishes intransitive “approve of” for a favorable opinion from transitive “approve something” for official acceptance or authorization. The official-authorization sense uses transitive “approve” with an object; do not collapse that separate sense into the “approve of doing” judgment pattern.
Oxford documents the person-action pattern as be banned + from + -ing and separately documents direct-object uses of ban. The cited evidence does not support person + to-infinitive as the equivalent prohibition construction.
