Using "for suppose".

Hi,

Do you see any problem with the use of "for suppose" below?

"Any general comment made about the war in Iraq would be misguided. For suppose a person said that it wasn't about freedom at all, but about oil. Would we then have to..."

The 'for suppose ....' is not correct. You need to omit 'for', which you are trying to use here in the sen

CliveHi,

Do you see any problem with the use of "for suppose" below?

"Any general comment made about the war in Iraq would be misguided. For suppose a person said that it wasn't about freedom at all, but about oil. Would we then have to..."

The 'for suppose ....' is not correct. You need to omit 'for', which you ar

I don't see a problem with "For suppose a person said ...", but your manner of asking the question makes me think you believe "for suppose" is a single unit. It isn't. It's "for", meaning "because", followed by "suppose (that) a person said ...".

Any comment ... would be misguided.
Because (For) (would be misguided for this reason: )
Suppose
(tha

Hi guys,

For suppose a person said that it wasn't about freedom at all, but about oil.

With regard to the query But isn't "for being used as a conjunction there?, my response would be to ask which two clauses it joins. None, as far as I can see, which is what bothers me about the original sentence. If you want to take a si

Clive,
Would you consider it all right if it were "....... misguided, for suppose ...oil."?
Jim

Hi,

"Any general comment made about the war in Iraq would be misguided, for suppose a person said that it wasn't about freedom at all, but about oil. Would we then have to..."

Well, that seems less open and shut to me. Let's simplify it to

Any comment about the w

Hello Clive

I made a simpler example as below. Do you think this use of 'for' is appropriate?

English grammar must be difficult to learn for non-natives.
For suppose it were easy to learn for them.
Would we then have here so many questioners?

paco

CliveHi guys,

For suppose a person said that it wasn't about freedom at all, but about oil.

... Both of these simple examples seem, to me, to be incorrect English, simply fragments.

Best wishes, Clive

Would you then say that these uses are incorrect?

That the sulphurous fumes spewed fo

Back to the original, if I may:

Any general comment made about the war in Iraq would be misguided. For suppose a person said that it wasn't about freedom at all, but about oil. Would we then have to...?


One thing that makes the for awkward is that, as a semi-coordinating conjunction, it does not like being positioned at the front of a sentence

Hi,

I think some people in this thread agree with me that a 'free-standing for sentence' is not grammatically desirable. Others don't seem to agree, so I'd like to address them a little further.

I agree with Mr. M that it's 'awkward' and 'more casual than we usually accept of written work'. I would add that, to me, it seems to add a rhetorical tone to