Suited to/for

Question

Hi,A: His gentle charisma is well suited to his role as a teacher of small children.B: His gentle charisma is well suited for his role as a teacher of small children.C: His gentle charisma is well suited to teaching small children.D: His gentle charisma is well suited to teach small children.E: His gentle charisma is well suited for teaching small children.Are all these sentences grammatically correct?  I'd appreciate your answer.

Tony Canard · Accepted Answer

I like the last one. It sounds right to me.

Jooney · Answer

Thanks, but the first is correct.  I'm not sure about the rest, though.

BarbaraPA · Answer

jooneyHi,

A: His gentle charisma is well suited to his role as a teacher of small children.

B: His gentle charisma is well suited for his role as a teacher of small children.

C: His gentle charisma is well suited to teaching small children.

D: His gentle charisma is well suited to teach small children.

E: His gentle charisma is well suited for teaching small children.

Are all these sentences grammatically correct? I'd appreciate your answer.

First - "gentle charisma" is a very strange thing to say. Perhaps "gentle demeanor" or "gentle disposition" is what you mean.
Second - It's much more common to say a person is well-suited for a position, not his personality.
Third - some dictionaries say to use a comma, even when it's not before a noun (and some don't) so just be consistent.

His gentle disposition makes him well-suited to teach small children. - You can use either "to" or "for" with little difference perceived by most people. Some will say "to" an action and "for" a noun (so "well-suited to teach" and "well-suited for a teaching position") but I expect most native speakers don't think about that difference much.

Jooney · Answer

Hi, Barbara

Thanks for the reply.

First - "gentle charisma" is a very strange thing to say. Perhaps "gentle demeanor" or "gentle disposition" is what you mean.

@ The first sentence is actually taken from an article written by a native speaker.(slightly modified)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/can-emotional-intelligence-be-taught.html?hpw&_r=0

Second - It's much more common to say a person is well-suited for a position, not his personality.

@ I see. I'll keep that in mind.

His gentle disposition makes him well-suited to teach small children. - You can use either "to" or "for" with little difference perceived by most people. Some will say "to" an action and "for" a noun (so "well-suited to teach" and "well-suited for a teaching position") but I expect most native speakers don't think about that difference much.

@ OK. So, according to your answer, B is preferred over A? What about C and E? Do they sound right to a native ear?

BarbaraPA · Answer

The original is a bit wordy for my taste, but there is nothing wrong with any of them. You correctly omitted the ungrammatical "for teach" from the choices."

Jooney · Answer

Thank you for your help, Barbara.

CalifJim · Answer

jooneyD: His gentle charisma is well suited to teach small children.

The structure is grammatical, but it doesn't work in this case because charisma can't teach. Only people can teach. So he himself might be well suited to teach small children, but his charisma can't be well suited to teach them.

He is well suited to teach small children. OK.

CJ

CalifJim · Answer

jooney-
A: His gentle charisma is well suited to his role as a teacher of small children.
B: His gentle charisma is well suited for his role as a teacher of small children.
C: His gentle charisma is well suited to teaching small children.
E: His gentle charisma is well suited for teaching small children.

I have racked my brain for an hour trying to find the elusive difference between suited to and suited for, and I have not come up with anything definitive.

Both are grammatical, however.

I prefer A to B and E to C, but that doesn't tell us much because I can't explain why. I'm not at all certain that the difference between the words that follow suited to/for (role and teaching) explains anything.

CJ

Jooney · Answer

Hi, CJ

The structure is grammatical, but it doesn't work in this case because charisma can't teach.

@ Now I can see clearly why my original sentence doesn't make much sense.

Thank you so much for the explanation!

Suited to/for

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions