"for" = of

[Damien Hall]

At 12/11/2009 09:45 AM, Charles Doyle wrote:
> Yeah, but are Mark's and Jonathan's lucid and elegant explanations
> OF or FOR the distinction?
>
> (Thus, we can imagine a student in a geography class, taking a test,
> who gives the wrong "capital for Kuwait.")

Joel replied:

'I think it's the careless *crossword-puzzle solver* who gives  the
wrong "capital for Italy."'

And Benjamin said:

> It seems that anyone faced with a list of countries whose capitals
> must be filled in would readily use "for."
>
> "Let's see. I got Jordan. What's the capital for Kuwait?"

Yes, but, whichever, the explanations given before still hold up (that the
values with which _for_ is appropriate are those which may not (yet) exist
or are still to be provided). The student in the geography class, taking a
test, gives the wrong 'capital for Kuwait' because, in a test, _Kuwait_ on
the test paper represents a question, and the capital represents the answer
to the question, _to be provided_. This is presumably why Benjamin's
instincts (and mine) about the test situation are the way they are.

Damien

--
Damien Hall

University of York
Department of Language and Linguistic Science
Heslington
YORK
YO10 5DD
UK

Tel. (office) +44 (0)1904 432665
     (mobile) +44 (0)771 853 5634
Fax  +44 (0)1904 432673

BORDERS AND IDENTITIES CONFERENCE, JAN 2010:
http://www.york.ac.uk/res/aiseb/bic2010/

http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/people/pages/hall.htm

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org