This tool is for you to build sentences correctly.

[Yourjones]

Hello

I wonder what the part in the quotation marks is in the sentence below. Would you kindly help?

This tool is "for you" to build sentences correctly.

Thanks.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: How to parse this sentence

1. What do you think?
2. Why do you need to know?

 

[PaulMatthews]

Re: How to parse this sentence

Hello

I wonder what the part in the quotation marks is in the sentence below. Would you kindly help?

This tool is "for you" to build sentences correctly.

Thanks.

"For you" is not a constituent.

You to build sentences correctly is a to-infinitival clause whose subject is "you". When a to-infinitival clause contains a subject, it also contains the clause subordinator (subordinating conjunction) for, which appears at the beginning of the clause, right before the subject.

In a tree diagram, this "for" would be assigned the function label 'marker' and the category label 'subordinator'.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: How to parse this sentence

PaulMatthews, did you notice that in post #2 I asked the OP to tell us what he/she thinks first? We try not to spoonfeed answers here.

 

[PaulMatthews]

Re: How to parse this sentence

PaulMatthews, did you notice that in post #2 I asked the OP to tell us what he/she thinks first? We try not to spoonfeed answers here.

The OP asked for help. Had they known, or had an incline of, the answer, they would surely have proffered it. And as for why they want to know; that's obvious - they want to learn about English grammar, just like the rest of us.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: How to parse this sentence

Plenty of learners ask for the answers without really trying themselves first. We regularly ask posters to give us their answers and their justification for those answers.
As far as why they want to know is concerned, that question certainly sounded remarkably like it might be homework. We don't help with homework or assignments, as shown in the forum rules.

 

[Rover_KE]

Yourjones, I have changed your thread title.


Extract from the Posting Guidelines:

'Thread titles should include all or part of the word/phrase being discussed.'

 

[Yourjones]

Re: How to parse this sentence

Plenty of learners ask for the answers without really trying themselves first. We regularly ask posters to give us their answers and their justification for those answers.
As far as why they want to know is concerned, that question certainly sounded remarkably like it might be homework. We don't help with homework or assignments, as shown in the forum rules.

I understand and agree OPs' questions had better not be answered directly if they ask purely for the sake of homework.

However, I did not give what I thought the answer should be because I really did not know it. "I was clear it was not subject, nor object of the sentence and so forth". Maybe I will add something like that to a question I post next time?

I am grateful Usingenglish's experts have helped answer lots of my questions, but I certainly will be more grateful if questions could be answered more straightforward.

I needed the answer because my friend's child asked me to help him with that question. In fact, my friends' children always come with different questions regarding English now that they know I am fond of and a bit good at English. As their 34-year-old friend, I probably do not have homework of parsing a sentence to do as I am preoccupied already by my job serving a British organisation in my home country.

Thank you all the same.

 

[Rover_KE]

Re: How to parse this sentence

I understand and agree OPs' questions had better not be answered directly if they ask purely for the sake of homework.

However, I did not give what I thought the answer should be because I really did not know it. "I was clear it was not subject, nor object of the sentence and so forth". Maybe I will add something like that to a question I post next time?

Yes, that's a good idea, though we're not in the business of doing a friend's child's homework, either.

 

[Tdol]

Re: How to parse this sentence

We seem to be generating more heat than light here.

 

[sjenica]

1) This tool helps you build your sentences.

Can this one substitute the sentence in question?

Thanks

 

[Tdol]

It's similar, but not exactly the same.

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER




Here is a similar sentence from one of my favorite books.

"He bought this car for his wife to use."

It explains the purpose of the purchase.

This is how the scholars parse it:

He= subject.
bought= verb.
this = adjective.
car = noun.
this car= the object of the verb "bought."
for = preposition.
his wife to use. = infinitive phrase; object of the preposition "for."
his= possessive adjective; wife = noun; to use = infinitive; his wife = the subject of "to use."






Source: House and Harman, Descriptive English Grammar (copyright 1931 and 1950), page 334.

 

[PaulMatthews]

NOT A TEACHER

for = preposition.

Source: House and Harman, Descriptive English Grammar (copyright 1931 and 1950), page 334.

I wouldn't go along with that. In modern grammar "for" is analysed as a subordinator in such examples, not a preposition. In the OP's This tool is for you to build sentences correctly, the underlined constituent is a non-finite subordinate clause whose subject is "you". The clause subordinator "for" does for infinitival clauses with subjects what the subordinator that does for declarative content clauses. Compare:

It is important that detailed records be kept.
It is important for detailed records to be kept.

Both "that" and "for" serve as syntactic markers of their particular syntactic construction, as those two examples demonstrate. They are both subordinators; neither is a preposition.

 

[sjenica]

It's similar, but not exactly the same.

Would you explain the difference; for which purpose to use the topic starter's one and for which mine?

Thanks

 

[PaulMatthews]

The OP asked a question and received an answer from me (#3) which they marked as 'liked'. They also separately pm'd me a 'thank you' for my answer. Tellingly, they also commented that they were very disappointed with the 'negative unhelpful' (I've toned down their actual words) responses from other contributors in this thread. I'm not telling the OP that what their teacher/textbook is telling them is wrong; indeed there’s no implication that the OP is even a student. In any case, I was replying to TheParser who was quoting from books over half a century old, which is hardly acceptable.

If the OP has any further concerns, they are free to post a further reply.

 

[sjenica]

1) The OP asked a question and received an answer from me (#3) which they marked as 'liked'. ...

Does "them" in 1) mean either "people" or "interested" or "those who read the answer" or he or she or both she and he ?
Would "the OP and some others", "the starter and some others", "the starter and some other people" work better or, is "them" rather OK for a NES ear or may be the best word for use in such sentence, and for such situation?
By and large, it's obvious I'm pretty confused with "them".

Thanks