TO vs. FOR (a very simple explanation)

If this had any measure of truth to it, Merry, you wouldn't so studiously avoid discussions on language.

That is the common wisdom, Letty, but it is simply false. Children of all languages "learn" the grammar of their language in their first few years. Then, in most countries, they are subjected to the most inane, nonsensical, abysmally simplistic discussions of what some people think is grammar.

People can effectively learn a second language with some grammar instruction, but that is mostly pointing out how the patterns of thew target language differ from the mother tongue.

This should be kept to an absolute minimum because the notion that people can consciously learn the grammar of any language is really silly. Consider that those who use, for example, English, those who have studied the grammar of English for years, still don't know all there is to know about how language is used.

That's another common misconception - that all there is to know about a language has already been discovered.

thans teacher. I really apreciatted your explanation. But , can you get more examples?

The explanation is good even for Spanish-speaking students.
In cases where is used TO, Spanish-speaking students can translate it as: A TI, a el, a ella, a trabajar.
In cases where is used FOR, the translation is: PARA TI, para el, para ella, para pintar.

Please explain the problem to me or for me?