“walking for five o'clock every morning.” “for”? Why not “at five o'clock”?
I'm reading a book on philosophical puzzles and problems. At a certain point it reads (as an aside comment, not as part of a puzzle):
"Before moving to Sweden, Descartes had a lifetime habit of staying in bed till 11.00 a.m. After only a few months in the cold northern climate, walking to the palace for 5 o'clock every morning, he died."
Any special reason for using "for" instead of "at five o'clock"? Can it be a pun? Am I missing something?
From Wikipedia - "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love." The strange thing is that she wanted classes at 5.00 a.m. (!!!)
Some may label this question as "proofreading". I understand it is specifically about prepositions, though.
EDIT
- context - From Wikipedia: "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love. She was interested in and stimulated Descartes to publish the "Passions of the Soul", a work based on his correspondence with Princess Elisabeth. He was a guest at the house of Pierre Chanut, less than 500 meters from Tre Kronor in Stockholm. Soon it became clear they did not like each other; she did not like his mechanical philosophy, he did not appreciate her interest in Ancient Greek. By 15 January 1650, Descartes had seen Christina only four or five times. On 1 February he caught a cold which quickly turned into a serious respiratory infection, and he died on 11 February."
Some authors believe that walking to the castle at 5.00 a.m. in Stockholm, in January and February, contributed to his catching pneumonia and dying.
prepositions
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
|
show 11 more comments
I'm reading a book on philosophical puzzles and problems. At a certain point it reads (as an aside comment, not as part of a puzzle):
"Before moving to Sweden, Descartes had a lifetime habit of staying in bed till 11.00 a.m. After only a few months in the cold northern climate, walking to the palace for 5 o'clock every morning, he died."
Any special reason for using "for" instead of "at five o'clock"? Can it be a pun? Am I missing something?
From Wikipedia - "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love." The strange thing is that she wanted classes at 5.00 a.m. (!!!)
Some may label this question as "proofreading". I understand it is specifically about prepositions, though.
EDIT
- context - From Wikipedia: "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love. She was interested in and stimulated Descartes to publish the "Passions of the Soul", a work based on his correspondence with Princess Elisabeth. He was a guest at the house of Pierre Chanut, less than 500 meters from Tre Kronor in Stockholm. Soon it became clear they did not like each other; she did not like his mechanical philosophy, he did not appreciate her interest in Ancient Greek. By 15 January 1650, Descartes had seen Christina only four or five times. On 1 February he caught a cold which quickly turned into a serious respiratory infection, and he died on 11 February."
Some authors believe that walking to the castle at 5.00 a.m. in Stockholm, in January and February, contributed to his catching pneumonia and dying.
prepositions
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
2
It is poorly worded. And, in fact, the wording may be a part of the puzzle.
– Hot Licks
Mar 28 '15 at 21:33
Surely a (lifetime - several months) [that's a minus sign] habit?
– Edwin Ashworth
Mar 28 '15 at 21:57
1
@HotLicks It is completely clear and obvious to a British English speaker. It is interesting that it isn't clear to a US English speaker of course.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:29
1
@dorothy: Judgments about speakers of US English, based on an extremely limited sampling, are unwarranted and in fact a bit dismissive.
– Robusto
Mar 29 '15 at 10:40
1
@Robusto I think you misunderstood me in at least two ways. First I wrote "a US English speaker" and second my intention was to be anything but dismissive. It was exactly to say that my comment about the obviousness to British English speakers wasn't to dismiss any conversation about its non-obviousness to non-British English speakers.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 10:45
|
show 11 more comments
I'm reading a book on philosophical puzzles and problems. At a certain point it reads (as an aside comment, not as part of a puzzle):
"Before moving to Sweden, Descartes had a lifetime habit of staying in bed till 11.00 a.m. After only a few months in the cold northern climate, walking to the palace for 5 o'clock every morning, he died."
Any special reason for using "for" instead of "at five o'clock"? Can it be a pun? Am I missing something?
From Wikipedia - "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love." The strange thing is that she wanted classes at 5.00 a.m. (!!!)
Some may label this question as "proofreading". I understand it is specifically about prepositions, though.
EDIT
- context - From Wikipedia: "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love. She was interested in and stimulated Descartes to publish the "Passions of the Soul", a work based on his correspondence with Princess Elisabeth. He was a guest at the house of Pierre Chanut, less than 500 meters from Tre Kronor in Stockholm. Soon it became clear they did not like each other; she did not like his mechanical philosophy, he did not appreciate her interest in Ancient Greek. By 15 January 1650, Descartes had seen Christina only four or five times. On 1 February he caught a cold which quickly turned into a serious respiratory infection, and he died on 11 February."
Some authors believe that walking to the castle at 5.00 a.m. in Stockholm, in January and February, contributed to his catching pneumonia and dying.
prepositions
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
I'm reading a book on philosophical puzzles and problems. At a certain point it reads (as an aside comment, not as part of a puzzle):
"Before moving to Sweden, Descartes had a lifetime habit of staying in bed till 11.00 a.m. After only a few months in the cold northern climate, walking to the palace for 5 o'clock every morning, he died."
Any special reason for using "for" instead of "at five o'clock"? Can it be a pun? Am I missing something?
From Wikipedia - "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love." The strange thing is that she wanted classes at 5.00 a.m. (!!!)
Some may label this question as "proofreading". I understand it is specifically about prepositions, though.
EDIT
- context - From Wikipedia: "Queen Christina of Sweden invited Descartes to her court in 1649 to organize a new scientific academy and tutor her in his ideas about love. She was interested in and stimulated Descartes to publish the "Passions of the Soul", a work based on his correspondence with Princess Elisabeth. He was a guest at the house of Pierre Chanut, less than 500 meters from Tre Kronor in Stockholm. Soon it became clear they did not like each other; she did not like his mechanical philosophy, he did not appreciate her interest in Ancient Greek. By 15 January 1650, Descartes had seen Christina only four or five times. On 1 February he caught a cold which quickly turned into a serious respiratory infection, and he died on 11 February."
Some authors believe that walking to the castle at 5.00 a.m. in Stockholm, in January and February, contributed to his catching pneumonia and dying.
prepositions
prepositions
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
edited 14 hours ago
Centaurus
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
asked Mar 28 '15 at 20:09
CentaurusCentaurus
38.7k31125247
38.7k31125247
2
It is poorly worded. And, in fact, the wording may be a part of the puzzle.
– Hot Licks
Mar 28 '15 at 21:33
Surely a (lifetime - several months) [that's a minus sign] habit?
– Edwin Ashworth
Mar 28 '15 at 21:57
1
@HotLicks It is completely clear and obvious to a British English speaker. It is interesting that it isn't clear to a US English speaker of course.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:29
1
@dorothy: Judgments about speakers of US English, based on an extremely limited sampling, are unwarranted and in fact a bit dismissive.
– Robusto
Mar 29 '15 at 10:40
1
@Robusto I think you misunderstood me in at least two ways. First I wrote "a US English speaker" and second my intention was to be anything but dismissive. It was exactly to say that my comment about the obviousness to British English speakers wasn't to dismiss any conversation about its non-obviousness to non-British English speakers.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 10:45
|
show 11 more comments
2
It is poorly worded. And, in fact, the wording may be a part of the puzzle.
– Hot Licks
Mar 28 '15 at 21:33
Surely a (lifetime - several months) [that's a minus sign] habit?
– Edwin Ashworth
Mar 28 '15 at 21:57
1
@HotLicks It is completely clear and obvious to a British English speaker. It is interesting that it isn't clear to a US English speaker of course.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:29
1
@dorothy: Judgments about speakers of US English, based on an extremely limited sampling, are unwarranted and in fact a bit dismissive.
– Robusto
Mar 29 '15 at 10:40
1
@Robusto I think you misunderstood me in at least two ways. First I wrote "a US English speaker" and second my intention was to be anything but dismissive. It was exactly to say that my comment about the obviousness to British English speakers wasn't to dismiss any conversation about its non-obviousness to non-British English speakers.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 10:45
2
2
It is poorly worded. And, in fact, the wording may be a part of the puzzle.
– Hot Licks
Mar 28 '15 at 21:33
It is poorly worded. And, in fact, the wording may be a part of the puzzle.
– Hot Licks
Mar 28 '15 at 21:33
Surely a (lifetime - several months) [that's a minus sign] habit?
– Edwin Ashworth
Mar 28 '15 at 21:57
Surely a (lifetime - several months) [that's a minus sign] habit?
– Edwin Ashworth
Mar 28 '15 at 21:57
1
1
@HotLicks It is completely clear and obvious to a British English speaker. It is interesting that it isn't clear to a US English speaker of course.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:29
@HotLicks It is completely clear and obvious to a British English speaker. It is interesting that it isn't clear to a US English speaker of course.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:29
1
1
@dorothy: Judgments about speakers of US English, based on an extremely limited sampling, are unwarranted and in fact a bit dismissive.
– Robusto
Mar 29 '15 at 10:40
@dorothy: Judgments about speakers of US English, based on an extremely limited sampling, are unwarranted and in fact a bit dismissive.
– Robusto
Mar 29 '15 at 10:40
1
1
@Robusto I think you misunderstood me in at least two ways. First I wrote "a US English speaker" and second my intention was to be anything but dismissive. It was exactly to say that my comment about the obviousness to British English speakers wasn't to dismiss any conversation about its non-obviousness to non-British English speakers.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 10:45
@Robusto I think you misunderstood me in at least two ways. First I wrote "a US English speaker" and second my intention was to be anything but dismissive. It was exactly to say that my comment about the obviousness to British English speakers wasn't to dismiss any conversation about its non-obviousness to non-British English speakers.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 10:45
|
show 11 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It means he aimed to arrive at 5 o'clock. Had it read "walking to the palace at 5 o'clock" it would not have been clear if that was the time he left, some time during the walk or the time at the end of the walk.
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
3
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
4
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
2
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
|
show 17 more comments
Apparently, this is a common way, in British English, of expressing that he walked with the intent of arriving AT the indicated place BY the indicated time.
I have never heard this usage "walk...for" in the USA.
(If any other AmE speakers have heard or seen it in AmE, please comment.)
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f236224%2fwalking-for-five-oclock-every-morning-for-why-not-at-five-oclock%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It means he aimed to arrive at 5 o'clock. Had it read "walking to the palace at 5 o'clock" it would not have been clear if that was the time he left, some time during the walk or the time at the end of the walk.
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
3
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
4
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
2
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
|
show 17 more comments
It means he aimed to arrive at 5 o'clock. Had it read "walking to the palace at 5 o'clock" it would not have been clear if that was the time he left, some time during the walk or the time at the end of the walk.
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
3
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
4
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
2
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
|
show 17 more comments
It means he aimed to arrive at 5 o'clock. Had it read "walking to the palace at 5 o'clock" it would not have been clear if that was the time he left, some time during the walk or the time at the end of the walk.
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
It means he aimed to arrive at 5 o'clock. Had it read "walking to the palace at 5 o'clock" it would not have been clear if that was the time he left, some time during the walk or the time at the end of the walk.
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
answered Mar 28 '15 at 20:22
dorothydorothy
338212
338212
3
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
4
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
2
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
|
show 17 more comments
3
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
4
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
2
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
3
3
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
Exactly. I do not understand why this obvious fact escaped others. It is quite normal (at least in Britain) to say something like he gets into work for 6 o'clock every morning.
– WS2
Mar 28 '15 at 22:30
4
4
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
I've never heard this usage anywhere in the US. I certainly wouldn't count it "obvious".
– Matt Gutting
Mar 28 '15 at 22:39
2
2
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
Indeed, the US usage would be "gets into work by 6 o'clock" (or even "at 6" depending on your emphasis).
– Lynn
Mar 29 '15 at 3:54
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@MattGutting It is obvious to a native British English speaker.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 8:50
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
@Lynn The use of "for" is subtly different. It implies that it is your aim to be there by 5 o'clock, not that you necessarily always succeed. Actually, to be more accurate, it implies that you are supposed to be there by 5 o'clock.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:30
|
show 17 more comments
Apparently, this is a common way, in British English, of expressing that he walked with the intent of arriving AT the indicated place BY the indicated time.
I have never heard this usage "walk...for" in the USA.
(If any other AmE speakers have heard or seen it in AmE, please comment.)
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Apparently, this is a common way, in British English, of expressing that he walked with the intent of arriving AT the indicated place BY the indicated time.
I have never heard this usage "walk...for" in the USA.
(If any other AmE speakers have heard or seen it in AmE, please comment.)
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Apparently, this is a common way, in British English, of expressing that he walked with the intent of arriving AT the indicated place BY the indicated time.
I have never heard this usage "walk...for" in the USA.
(If any other AmE speakers have heard or seen it in AmE, please comment.)
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
Apparently, this is a common way, in British English, of expressing that he walked with the intent of arriving AT the indicated place BY the indicated time.
I have never heard this usage "walk...for" in the USA.
(If any other AmE speakers have heard or seen it in AmE, please comment.)
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
answered Mar 29 '15 at 14:30
Brian HitchcockBrian Hitchcock
12.6k11637
12.6k11637
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Well, if someone has a regular meeting ingrained into their routine, or just a lot of meetings, it's possible they would use "for", but with a possessive pronoun and omit the word "meeting". For example, George bumped into Greta on the way to the conference room for his 10 o'clock.
– Spencer
Apr 24 '17 at 2:54
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
Yes, or with an indefinite article in American English at least: I need to go, I have a 2 o'clock. Left out and implied is (meeting/appointment/class/etc.)
– Damila
14 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
I don't buy this at all. "We must be there for 5 a.m." would pass muster, walking there for it does not.
– Lambie
13 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
@Lambie He had to be at the palace for / by / at "5 o'clock every morning". The fact that he was walking is incidental to the use of "for".
– TrevorD
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f236224%2fwalking-for-five-oclock-every-morning-for-why-not-at-five-oclock%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
It is poorly worded. And, in fact, the wording may be a part of the puzzle.
– Hot Licks
Mar 28 '15 at 21:33
Surely a (lifetime - several months) [that's a minus sign] habit?
– Edwin Ashworth
Mar 28 '15 at 21:57
1
@HotLicks It is completely clear and obvious to a British English speaker. It is interesting that it isn't clear to a US English speaker of course.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 9:29
1
@dorothy: Judgments about speakers of US English, based on an extremely limited sampling, are unwarranted and in fact a bit dismissive.
– Robusto
Mar 29 '15 at 10:40
1
@Robusto I think you misunderstood me in at least two ways. First I wrote "a US English speaker" and second my intention was to be anything but dismissive. It was exactly to say that my comment about the obviousness to British English speakers wasn't to dismiss any conversation about its non-obviousness to non-British English speakers.
– dorothy
Mar 29 '15 at 10:45