<When using "used to" to mean, "did something in the past often," never ever split the "used" and the "to." >
Where did that "rule" come from? Isn't it prescriptive?
<It's just that "used to" is a special construction with special rules that doesn't really match the rest of the language. >
The dominant rule is 'use "use to" spelling in negatives and questions'.
<Consider "have to," "has to," and "had to." In the first two, the final consonant in the verb is pronounced soft, like an "f" and a soft "s," but in the last one, the final consonant, the "d," is still pronounced hard, like a "d." >
And what has that got to do with a discussion on the use of "used to"?
Where did that "rule" come from? Isn't it prescriptive?
<It's just that "used to" is a special construction with special rules that doesn't really match the rest of the language. >
The dominant rule is 'use "use to" spelling in negatives and questions'.
<Consider "have to," "has to," and "had to." In the first two, the final consonant in the verb is pronounced soft, like an "f" and a soft "s," but in the last one, the final consonant, the "d," is still pronounced hard, like a "d." >
And what has that got to do with a discussion on the use of "used to"?