'for' = 'totaling/covering'?

[victor steinbok]

xx for a total of xx

VS-)

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:18 PM, Brian Hitchcock <brianhi at skechers.com>wrote:

>
> In the  Top Story on www.CNN.com  9/7/2011 .
>
> ==========================================================
>
> "On Tuesday alone, the Texas Forest Service responded to 19 new fires for
> 1,490 acres....
>
> In the past seven days Texas Forest Service has responded to 172 fires for
> 135,051 acres."
>
> ==========================================================



...
> Clearly, using 'for' makes it shorter  to say  --- it just sounds funny (to
> me). These sound better (to me):
>
>    xx fires COVERING xxx acres
>
> or
>
>    xx fires TOTALING xxx acres
>
> or
>
>    xx fires INVOLVING xxx acres
>
> or
>
>  xx fires ON xxx acres
>
>
>
> But then, I'm not from Texas.  Thoughts, anyone?

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