In general, LINQ is a higher-level (more abstract) querying language than SQL and this creates some major scope for translation loss in a SQL→LINQ direction. For one, LINQ emits shaped results whereas SQL emits flat result sets. The upshot is that an automatic translation from SQL to LINQ will often have to perform more of a transliteration than translation – and generate examples of how NOT to write LINQ queries. For this reason, I’m loathed to implement such a feature. It would be rather like writing a tool to convert VB6 to C# 4, and then using the output to “learn” C# 4.

To use LINQ properly, you must learn to translate your requirements DIRECTLY into LINQ. If you think first in SQL and then translate to LINQ, you’ll get the worst of both worlds!