For your convenience

[Ju]

I have prepared a car outside for your convenience.

Can I use 'to your convenience' or 'at your convenience' to replace 'for your convenience'?

Thanks.

 

[tedmc]

No, but you can say: You can use the car I have prepared for you at your convenience

 

[Ju]

No, but you can say: You can use the car I have prepared for you at your convenience

Thanks for your kind reply.

Then what are the differences in usage among 'at , in and for your convenience? Could you give me some examples?

Thanks.

 

[Tarheel]

I'm not sure what you mean by prepared a car.

 

[Ju]

I'm not sure what you mean by prepared a car.

I mean I've prepared a car for him so he can drive to wherever he wants to go.

 

[Rover_KE]

Do you own a car rental business? You still haven't told us what you mean by 'prepared a car'.

What are the differences in usage [STRIKE]among[/STRIKE] between 'at', 'in' and 'for' your convenience?

Ted gave you an example of 'at your convenience'; 'in your convenience' doesn't exist.

 

[Ju]

No, I don't own a car business.
I mean that I have a car ready and standby at his disposal.

 

[tedmc]

No, I don't own a car business.
I mean that I have a car ready and on standby at his disposal.

I think I know where you are coming from. Prepare (zhun bei) and get ready are the same in Chinese but not in English.

 

[Rover_KE]

I mean that I have a car ready and on standby at his disposal.

Then that's what you should say.

 

[jutfrank]

Only for is possible in your sentence.

Then what are the differences in usage among 'at , in and for your convenience? Could you give me some examples?

First of all, don't use in because it's never correct.

Use at when you're talking about a time. Look at the examples in any good dictionary, such as this: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/at-your-convenience

Use for when you want to talk about a purpose, such as in your original example.


As others have pointed out, prepared is not the best word to use. You could use provided, if that's what you mean. I have provided a car for your convenience.

 

[Tarheel]

I mean I've prepared a car for him so he can drive to wherever he wants to go.

You used the same phrase to explain the phrase. Do you understand why that is unhelpful?

I have read the rest of the thread, and got the car ready seems to be the correct phrase.

 

[Winwin2011]

I think I know where you are coming from. Prepare (zhun bei) and get ready are the same in Chinese but not in English.

Not a teacher

I understand the meaning "Prepare (zhun bei) (預備 ) and get ready are the same in Chinese" . But I don't understand why "prepare and "get ready" have different meaning. Can you explain it to me, please?

 

[Tarheel]

Not a teacher

I understand the meaning "Prepare (zhun bei) (預備 ) and get ready are the same in Chinese" . But I don't understand why "prepare and "get ready" have different meanings. Can you explain it to me, please?

I don't think it's helpful to compare Chinese to English.

 

[tedmc]

Not a teacher

I understand the meaning "Prepare (zhun bei) (預備 ) and get ready are the same in Chinese" . But I don't understand why "prepare and "get ready" have different meaning. Can you explain it to me, please?

Learners of English whose Chinese is their mother tongue face this challenge all the time. It is only natural for them to think in their mother tongue and translate their thoughts to English (native English speakers learning a foreign language would do that too.) That is why you have the weird sentences posted in this forum. There is no easy solution to this; you just have to put on a different thinking cap when you communicate in English. This is why doing a lot of reading is important, apart from attending English lessons and doing homework.

We just don't say "prepare a car" as we would "prepare a meal" or "prepare for class". Of course you could argue that, to get a car ready in tip-top condition, some preparation work is involved, such as getting it serviced and washed. There are certain things which we (even native speakers) can't explain "why"; that is just the way it is.