Prohibit Someone From Doing vs. Prohibit Someone To Do
Cambridge records prohibit + person + from + -ing for preventing an action and also allows prohibit + noun/-ing when the prohibited activity itself is the object. The to-infinitive is not the parallel complement for this sense.
ReviewedEvidence1 sourceSectionEnglish Usage
Quick answer
Use “prohibit someone from doing something” when a rule or authority prevents that person from taking the action. Do not treat “prohibit someone to do” as the parallel modern complement.
Key details
Confusion Familygrammar-and-usage distinction
Rule Familypreposition and verb-complement pattern
TermsProhibit Someone From Doing, Prohibit Someone To Do
Further guidance
Boundary
A nearby to-infinitive can belong to another part of the sentence, so diagnose the syntax before editing; the point is that prohibit does not use person + to-infinitive as the ordinary complement meaning forbid an action.
Construction
The person blocked from an action is expressed with prohibit + person + from + -ing; if the activity itself is the object, constructions such as “prohibit smoking” are also possible.
Decision
Use “prohibit someone from doing something” when a rule or authority prevents that person from taking the action. Do not treat “prohibit someone to do” as the parallel modern complement.
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.
