Talk:into

Wouldn't the use of the word 'into' in the sentence "I'm into Shakespeare right now" qualify as a verb? -Fbv65edel 19:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

No, that isn't the case. "To be" is the verb in that case, and "into" remains a preposition. I do have a separate question, though. Would there ever be a reason to use "in to" rather than "into?"--Pirsqed 16:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd guess that there are cases where a verbal phrase includes "in", which might be followed by "to" as a separate preposition, though I can't think of a good example. Also, of course, any place where "to" should occur as part of an infinitive verb it would be incorrect to use "into": "He goes in to eat." --Xyzzyva 22:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

My favorite illustration of the difference between in to and into is "I brought the cake in to my mother" vs. "I pushed the cake into my mother". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

into's real meaning...

Into, in America, is a way of mathematics. For example, 3 into 9 = 3. It is a type of division. — This unsigned comment was added by 129.71.168.232 (talk) at 17:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC).

Preposition: In the direction of; toward:

look into the distance; point into the sky --Backinstadiums (talk) 10:31, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Spy into one's customers' purchasing habits

Is the meaning used here already added? Spy into one's customers' purchasing habits --Backinstadiums (talk) 09:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

RFV discussion: September–October 2020

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

into

RFV sense 7:

7. (mathematics) Taking distinct arguments to distinct values.

The exponential function maps the set of real numbers into itself.

I haven't been able to find clear verification that this definition is technically correct (leaving aside for the moment the fact that this is not strictly the definition of a preposition and should probably be converted to "non-gloss"). In fact, two places where I have found this sense of "into" explained, [1] and [2], both seem not to support it, as far as I can tell. I don't feel qualified to judge this. Does anyone know for sure? Mihia (talk) 20:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

The given definition is that of an injective function. While the term onto is commonly used in mathematical parlance for the dual notion of a surjective function – even as an adjective – the term into has no similar status. It is the preposition of choice for the special case of inclusion maps, which are injective functions – but probably not so much that it attains lexical status. The usex suggests a sense of ”not surjective“, which is also how the first place linked to above defines it, and it is perhaps also sometimes used that way. The second place linked to defines it as a synonym of to, which I think is more common than specifically excluding surjections. Inclusion maps are normally not surjective, but this is not essential to their mathematical definition; the identity function is surjective and trivially also an inclusion map.  --Lambiam 08:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at this. In this instance, I'm afraid I will have to leave it to you and/or others to determine whether we need a mathematical definition for "into", and, if so, how it should read. Mihia (talk) 22:08, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I think we don't need one for a presumed mathematical meaning of the preposition when used for marking the range of a function (“a function from A into B ”), because it does not have a specific mathematical meaning in such uses. As used here, here and here it is synonymous with to, which it also is in the lead of the Wikipedia article Functional (mathematics) and in countless other places.  --Lambiam 15:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)