2
   

Is "for" redundant?

 
 
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 07:53 am
A government paediatrician in Sarawak, who requested for anonymity, said: “(Being) short-staffed is an understatement".

Is "for" needed?

Thanks.


Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/malaysian-health-sector-doctors-overworked-12114348
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 2 • Views: 132 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
chai2
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 08:05 am
@tanguatlay,
The word “for” shouldn’t be there at all.
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 08:25 am
@chai2,
chai2 wrote:

The word “for” shouldn’t be there at all.

Not sure about that. It's not needed but I think it can be placed there (grammatically speaking).
Region Philbis
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 08:29 am
@tsarstepan,

it doesn't sound right with "for".

i suppose you could say that someone was "recommended for anonymity"...
0 Replies
 
Roberta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 01:51 pm
The "for" isn't redundant. It's just plain wrong.
0 Replies
 
tanguatlay
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 07:00 pm
Many thanks to all of you.
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is "for" redundant?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/13/2019 at 03:42:41