The question about "the role of infinitive in this sentence" prompted me to ask the following question.
English uses a "dummy" such as it and there to start a sentence when there is nothing else to start an extra-posed sentence in the linked question or a sentence starting with "there". Please read the comments below the answer.
I object to calling "there" a subject of the sentence in the following:
There is a man at the door.
There is redundant as it could be rephrased to "A man is at the door/A man is there (pointing at the door)" as "at the door" indicates the place where a man physically exist at this moment. Here, "there" is a dummy which means nothing.
There was no snow yesterday.
In this sentence, there means nothing and just indicates the existence of "snow" yesterday.
Oxford Online Dictionary classifies this dummy "there" as an "adverb"
3 (usually there is/are) Used to indicate the fact or existence of something: ‘there’s a restaurant round the corner’
Let's say two people are engaged in a phone conversation:
A: There was much snow yesterday in our town. Was there much snow?
B: Here was not much (snow).
If "there" in the abvoe is a subject as a dummy, why is "here" not a subject?
Note: I read the linked previous question with an interest but it doesn't address why "here" cannot be a dummy subject like dummy there.