alexander koryagin:

> I'll have Joe fetch a shovel
> Now all we have to do is get there!
>
> If I were they :) I'd write "I'll have Joe _to_ fetch a shovel"
> and "Now all we have to do is _to_ get there!"

Do you entertain similar misgivings about `let', as in "Let
me fetch the shovel"; or about "make", as in "I will make
you regret it"; or about `have' but with passive voice, e.g.
"I will have my hair cut"; or when there is no a verb at
all, as in the Huey "piano" Smith song -- "We will have him
on the alimony"?

The Authorised version of The Bible has both variants in the
same sentece:

   He made him /ride/ on the high places of the earth, that
   he might eat the increase of the fields; and he made him
   /to suck/ honey out of the rock, and oil out of the
   flinty rock.

The second sentence is different, and `to' is optional in it
because "get there" is parallel to "do", and the second `to'
may be implied, as it is in:

   He is the author of "The Camera" and (of) "The Negative".

On the other hand, The Grammar of English Grammars has this
example:

   I would willingly have him /producing/ [/produce/, or /to
   produce/] his credentials.

---