To & For

Hi everyone,

“Karen and her new boyfriend are coming to dinner.” Right. Can I say “Karen and her boyfriend are coming FOR dinner” too?

Thanks in advance. Cheerio.

Er, just another question, please. “Karen’s dad has talked about him a lot.” Right. Is it wrong to say “Karen’s dad has talked a lot about him”? Does it just sound a little odd, by any chance?

Thanks once again. Bye bye

No, it sounds okay. :slight_smile:
It just shifts the emphasis from the person (him) to the action (talking).

Hi Bev,

That’s good news. I’ll place a bet that “Karen and her boyfriend are coming FOR dinner” is wrong. I’m a good gambler, aren’t I? :slight_smile:

I’m afraid you’d lose your shirt (lose heavily on a gamble). There’s nothing wrong with that either. Both ‘for’ and ‘to’ both work there, though ‘to’ is the usual option.

Wow! English has no more secrets for me! LoL

PS: I’m not afraid for that shirt, It was very old. I can buy a new one now! :wink:


You would not say ‘I’m not afraid for that shirt’, though. I used ‘I’m afraid’ as a means of saying ‘I’m sorry to tell you that’, but it doesn’t work in your sentence.
You need to use ‘worried about’ with the meaning of ‘I have no concerns for’. I’m not worried about that shirt, it was very old.

“I (have no concerns for)/(am not worried about) that shirt, it is/was very old.”
Is this sentence OK using either ‘is’ or ‘was’?

Hi dear Bev, thanks for your correction.

Allifathima, I think “is” doesn’t work in that sentence because you have no more the shirt.


PS: I see that this site is become the country of the spammers :-/

You could only use ‘was’ if the shirt were already destroyed/lost.