Both are correct grammar. The second is a non-native usage. 'For' is also common.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
Mister MicawberBoth are correct grammar.The second is a non-native usage.'For' is also common.Thank you, teacher.
AnonymousJust curiousSo this is not a serious grammar concern?
Mister MicawberSo this is not a serious grammar concern?No, it is serious and that is why I am curious. I did not know that it implies that I am not serious.
Anonymous I am curious.You have been using it as a stock remark before additional questions on a thread, and it makes me hesitant to bother responding.
Mister Micawber Anonymous I am curious.You have been using it as a stock remark before additional questions on a thread, and it makes me hesitant to bother responding.The answer is 'yes'.Thank you for telling me that, and I will make sure not to use it in that way next time, because every queation I ask is important to me.
Anonymous I would like to know if both of these sentences are possibleYes; the first indicates that you are not serious and the implication also still exists.
Mister MicawberYes; the first indicates that you are not serious and the implication also still exists.Thank you. And the second implies also that I am not serious but the implication is in the past and does not exist now. Would that be correct?
Anonymous the implication is in the past and does not exist now. Would that be correct?No; it is a form of reported speech, so it may apply to either past or present.
Mister MicawberNo; it is a form of reported speech, so it may apply to either past or present.I see. So does that mean that the tenses are just back-shifted and as you said, may refer to the present, which is the form of reported speech?