1-I didn't buy that car from your dad for you to drive it.
2-I didn't buy that car from your dad, for you to drive it.
Don't these two sentences have different meanings?
I think in 1, I did buy the car and I am saying my intention for buying it wasn't to let you drive it and in 2 I wanted you to drive it so I didn't buy it.
Am I correct?
Is the comma absolutely necessary if the second meaning is intended?
Last edited by navi tasan; 09-Mar-2005 at 19:35.
Again, I wouldn't put the comma myself. The idea being exactly the same as in your previous example. It doesn't bring anything new to your sentence, it doesn't change anything.
Originally Posted by navi tasan
I am not sure about this but I think there might be a difference.
A) I didn't buy that car from your father to have you drive it. (I bought it to drive it myself).
B) In order for you to drive your dad's car, I didn't buy it from him. (I let him keep it so that you might drive it).
I think 1 corresponds to A and 2 to B. In other words, in one case I did buy the car and in the other I didn't.
The same goes for the "so that" question.
Like I said, I may be wrong, but in that case either the sentence (the one without a comma, since the comma doesn't change a thing) is ambiguous or it can only mean either A or B.
I think 2 corr
in one case I did buy the car and in the other I didn't.
No, I don't think so, Navi. It's clear to me that in both sentences - comma or not - you did not buy the car. The word "for" is an essential part of the whole sentence and you can't separate these two parts.