Which phrase would be correct? 1. "For no change in premium..." or 2. "With no change in premium..."
jlinger is probably right...however, a word of caution. You should always include at the very least a grammatically complete sentence in order to supply a hint of context. More often than not, context matters. Possibly it doesn't matter here...but I'm just saying.
You should always include at the very least a grammatically complete sentence in order to supply a hint of context. More often than not, context matters.
Hartford Insurance Company has proposed continuing the current disability and life insurance plans with no change in premium rates to the basic life insurance plan, accidental death and dismemberment, long term disability and short term disability programs.
A staggering percentage of life insurance policies require restructuring. A study of a large sample of trust owned life insurance policies found a 75% chance that premiums could be reduced by 40% or more, or that the death benefit payable could be increased by at least 40% for no change in premium.*
Can you see the difference context makes?
Last edited by David L.; 05-May-2009 at 08:54.
Nope. Can't see any difference at all.
Perhaps a non-native speaker, accustomed to wrestling with subtleties in learning English, will be able to explain it to you.
Let's see who else responds.
I am a non-native speaker and here's how I look at it.
If I were an insurance holder, I'd find the second statment positive in that I could get more benefit for no change in premium. The first statement sounds a bit matter-of-fact to me.
Am I correct in my understanding?
"...could be increased by at least 40% for no change in premium."
In effect, 'policy holders would be getting something for nothing'
"... proposed continuing the current disability and life insurance plans with no change in..."
In contrast, in (1), 'things continue without change...'