0
Grammarian-bot Posted 19 years ago
Grammar

Redundancy of FOR.

0 Don't you think that the second for is redundant? 02br
02br
00A recent 01i00New York Times02i00 editorial criticized the city’s election board 01i01b00for02b02i00, first of all, failing to replace outmoded voting machines prone to breakdowns, and 00second, 01i01b00for 02b02i00failing to 00investigate allegations of corruption involving board members.02br
02br
00GB 0-
  

Top answer

0 it is okay 0-

— Inchoateknowledge

  • 0 it is okay 0-
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.

5 Answers
0
0 01blockquote
01cite10Grammarian-bot12cite10Don't you think that the second for is redundant? 12br
12br
10<!--[endif]-->A recent 11i10New York Times12i10 editorial criticized the city’s election board 11i11b10for12b12i10, first of all,10 failing to replace outmo
0
0
0 Thank You02br
02br
00GB0-
0
0
0 The second 01i00for02i00 is not required, but it helps to clarify the sentence structure. Without it, the reader might just possibly think that 01i00failing to investigate ...02i00 is the subject of a new clause.02br
02br
00 CJ0-
0
0
0 To me, required on the basis of symmetry and clarity. 0-
0

Related Questions