Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: For

    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Lithuanian
      • Home Country:
      • Lithuania
      • Current Location:
      • Lithuania

    • Join Date: Sep 2012
    • Posts: 2
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #1

    Post For

    news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-release-2011-tax-return-paid-irs-14-181125301--election.html

    "The Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 of mostly investment income for an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent."

    I cannot find the definition from this dictionary

    -- learnersdictionary.com/search/for

    that fits the sentence. Could it be that "for" is used incorrectly?

  1. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 21,362
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #2

    Re: For

    Quote Originally Posted by Momente View Post
    news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-release-2011-tax-return-paid-irs-14-181125301--election.html

    "The Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 of mostly investment income for an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent."

    I cannot find the definition from this dictionary

    -- learnersdictionary.com/search/for

    that fits the sentence. Could it be that "for" is used incorrectly?
    Yes, it's right. You can replace 'for' with 'giving' if you need to.

    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • England

    • Join Date: Jun 2010
    • Posts: 18,084
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #3

    Re: For

    I'd use at.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •