Is "request to" considered to be correct, as in "We request the court
clerk to issue a summons."

thouston --

Both "request [someone] to [do something]" and "request that [someone
do something]" are entirely correct, and both are very common.  
However, the use of "to" rather than "that" with "request" appears to
be significantly more popular.

As to the correctness of each version, two very good dictionaries at
my disposal recognize them both as grammatical.

First, from the American Heritage dictionary, here is its first
definition of "request,"  along with three usage examples:

"Request [] 1. To express a desire for; ask for. Often used with an
infinitive or clause: requested information about the experiment;
requested to see the evidence firsthand; requested that the bus driver
stop at the next corner."

"The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition" Houghton Mifflin Company (2003.


The eminent Oxford English Dictionary lists the "request to" usage
first, and the "request that" usage as an alternative:

"Request [] 1. (a) With infinitive.  To express a wish or desire 'to'
have, hear, etc. (b) Similarly, with 'that' or objective clause."

"The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, Vol II," Oxford
University Press (1971).


As for which is the more common, the following two simple Google
searches justify (fairly, I think)the conclusion that "request to" is
the winner:

"requested to" (gets 1,750,000 "hits")
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22requested+to%22


"requested that" (gets "only" 1,110,000 hits)
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22requested+that%22


If we limit our searches only to the websites of educational
institutions (designated by ".edu"), "requested to" wins again, by a
very similar percentage:

"requested to" (gets 245,000 hits)
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22requested+to%22+site%3Aedu


"requested that" (gets 145,000 hits)
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22requested+that%22+site%3Aedu



Under the circumstances, you can be confident about being
grammatically correct if you use either "to" or "that" with "request"
or "requested."


Search Stategy:

I used dictionaries that I have on hand to determine the correct
grammatical usages, and I devised the above Google searches to help
bolster the point that either usage is correct and to add information
about their relative popularity.


I hope that I have answered your question to your complete
satisfaction.  If anything is unclear, please ask for clarification
before rating the answer.

markj-ga

I'm not sure of the official stance on that, but I've always found it
terribly awkward, and so I avoid that usage in favor of,

"We request THAT the court issue a summons."

--Joey

I agree with Joey. While "We request the court clerk to issue a
summons" may not be wrong, to my ear it does not sound as good as "We
request that the court clerk issue a summons."

Hi,
I'm from Brazil and English for me is a foreign language.
Reading the comments (and having researched Google - so I know I'm
wrong in what I'm going to say)I would think that "We
request that the court clerk issueS a summons" would be right.
Can you tell me how would you feel hearing or reading the sentence this way?
Thanks
Luntes

Luntes,

"Issue" is used (instead of than "issues") in the sentence "We request
that the court clerk issue a summons" because the verb is in the
subjunctive mood.

"A verb is in the subjunctive mood when it expresses a condition which
is doubtful or not factual. It is most often found in a clause
beginning with the word if. It is also found in clauses following a
verb that expresses a doubt, a wish, regret, request, demand, or
proposal.

These are verbs typically followed by clauses that take the subjunctive: 

ask, demand, determine, insist, move, order, pray, prefer, recommend,
regret, request, require, suggest, and wish.

In English there is no difference between the subjunctive and normal,
or indicative, form of the verb except for the present tense third
person singular and for the verb to be.

The subjunctive for the present tense third person singular drops the
-s or -es so that it looks and sounds like the present tense for
everything else."

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000031.htm

French, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish use the subjunctive mood much
more than does modern English. The subjunctive is dying out in
English, but it's not extinct yet, and the sentence above is a good
example of one of the surviving usages.

Thanks Pinkfreud,
As I said, I knew that would be wrong.
What I wanted to know was if the phrase that way would sound
completely weird or if people would sometimes say it that way
(illiterate people, for example).
And it was good to know that English is changing like Brazilian
Portuguese is(in fact, Portuguese would be more like English - with a
less complicated grammar - in 200 years than it is now).
Luntes

You know, luntes, that's kind of an "advanced" thing to say to begin
with, so I don't know that "illiterate" people would even organize
something with that syntax.  I know that I don't have to think about
how to say it . . . it's just natural (as is the case with most things
as a native speaker).

However, with forms of "be", less educated people have been known to
mistakenly not use the subjunctive form.

For instance, I've heard less educated people say something along the
lines of, "If I was in charge," or, "If she was my child."  But, to
most people they both would sound very awkward.  For the record, the
correct way to say these are, "If I were in charge," and, "If she were
my child."

--Joey

Thanks, Joey,
You fulfilled my curiosity.
Luntes

Luntes,

If I were to encounter the sentence "We request that the court clerk
issueS a summons," my first thought would not be "the person who said
this is probably illiterate." My first thought would be "the person
who said this is probably not a native speaker of English." As Joey
mentions, the sentence is structured in a rather formal way that would
not come naturally to an illiterate person.

Some language buffs wring their hands at the changes that English is
undergoing. Personally, I am not displeased to see the subjunctive
mood ebbing away. I take great delight in the English language, but
the simplification of the grammar used in everyday speech does not, in
my view, rob us of anything worth saving. Now if only we could
simplify the spelling of English words...

I would add that use of poor grammar is only an indication, but not
proof, of poor education, and certainly not a sign of low
intelligence.  I have known very well educated and highly intelligent
people who use poor grammar in casual conversation, primarily because
that is what they learned initially at home.  They may know the rules
quite well, and use them correctly in writing and formal speech, but
in casual conversation, they revert to what they are most comfortable
with.  As Benjamin Franklin said, "Write with the learned, pronounce
with the vulgar"

Thanks, Pinkfreud, for your second comment.
You fulfilled what was left of my curiosity.
Luntes