《咬文嚼字》1995年第七辑上有一篇文章题为《“涉及到”及其他》,作者指出“涉及到”、“触及到”中的“到”与“及”同义之后,便得出结论:“到”字是“蛇足”。笔者不同意这个结论。 吕叔湘、朱德熙两位先生在《语法修辞讲话》中说:“语法不是逻辑……有些话虽然用严格的逻辑眼光来分析有点说不过去,但大家都这样说,都懂得它的意思,听的人和说 An article in the seventh series of 1995 titled “Related to” and others, “the author states that” to “and” to reach “are synonymous with” and “and” Conclusion: “To” is “snake foot”. I do not agree with this conclusion. Lv Shuxiang and Zhu Dexi said in his “Grammatical Rhetoric Speech”: "Grammar is not logic ... Although some words can not be justified by strict logic, we all say that we understand what it means and whoever listens And say