0
Anonymous Posted 14 years ago
Grammar

Hello, teachers!

I feel like 'because of' and 'for' as a meaning of cause and reason can be interchangeable like 'because' and 'for' but I know that there are collocations. What do native English speakers think about my feeling? Thank you as usual and have a good day.
  

Top answer

My first instinct is that they cannot fit into the same sentence grammars. Do you have an example in mind?

— Mister Micawber

  • My first instinct is that they cannot fit into the same sentence grammars.
  • Do you have an example in mind?
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

7 Answers
0
My first instinct is that they cannot fit into the same sentence grammars. Do you have an example in mind?
0
0
Yes, that's right; they are synonymous. What we usually cannot do is front the 'for' phrase:

Because of lack of food he was sick.
(X) For lack of food he was sick.
0
0
Thank you and then, is there any change in your opinion about 'cry for' and 'cry because of'? I think that 'cry for' is more common as a collocation but either one says the same. What do you think? Thank you.
0
0
Oliver cried for the gruel = Oliver asked for the gruel.
Oliver cried because of the gruel = The gruel made Oliver sick.

One verb does not always work with prepositions in the same way that another does.
0
0
Thank you so much and I am really sorry about taking your time a lot and I have realized again that English is really a mysterious language and could you just say 'yes' or 'no' to these sentences.

1. We could not see it for the mist.

2. We could not see it because of the mist.

3. He didn't answer for fear of hurtin
0
0
Yes, each pair of sentences is synonymous. #4 is not good grammar, though:

He didn't answer because of the fear of hurting her.
0

Related Questions