• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Does this sentence make sense?

yankeesfan

Diamond Member
"Do not simply explain for what each stands."

I'm trying to say "Do not simply explain what each stands for", but in a different, yet concise, manner.
 
Originally posted by: heathertre
I think it should read "Do not simply explain for what each object (or whatever) stands for."

I know, but isn't "for" a preposition? Isn't there some rule that they aren't supposed to end sentences?
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
"Do not simply explain for what each stands."

I'm trying to say "Do not simply explain what each stands for", but in a different, yet concise, manner.

yes, that's correct, but i think you need to include what each thing you're talking about.
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
Originally posted by: heathertre
I think it should read "Do not simply explain for what each object (or whatever) stands for."

I know, but isn't "for" a preposition? Isn't there some rule that they aren't supposed to end sentences?
It's a non-error that goes against standard usage. I'd avoid ending with superfluous prepositions (like "at") or ones that beg a subject ("with," in many cases), but in this instance I don't see a problem ending your sentence with "stands for."

But if you still don't like the sound, you could rephrase it like this:
"Do not simply explain what each object symbolizes."

Or try using the word "represents," or something along those lines.

EDIT: Here's an especially relevant passage from Jack Lynch's Guide to Grammar and Style:
Whatever the merit of the rule ? and both historically and logically, there's not much ? there's a substantial body of opinion against end-of-sentence prepositions; if you want to keep the crusty old-timers happy, try to avoid ending written sentences (and clauses) with prepositions, such as to, with, from, at, and in. Instead of writing "The topics we want to write on," where the preposition on ends the clause, consider "The topics on which we want to write." Prepositions should usually go before (pre-position) the words they modify.

On the other hand ? and it's a big other hand ? old-timers shouldn't always dictate your writing, and you don't deserve your writing license if you elevate this rough guideline into a superstition. Don't let it make your writing clumsy or obscure; if a sentence is more graceful with a final preposition, let it stand. For instance, "He gave the public what it longed for" is clear and idiomatic, even though it ends with a preposition; "He gave the public that for which it longed" avoids the problem but doesn't look like English. A sentence becomes unnecessarily obscure when it's filled with from whoms and with whiches.
 
Originally posted by: yankeesfan
"Do not simply explain for what each stands."

I'm trying to say "Do not simply explain what each stands for", but in a different, yet concise, manner.

Put a comma after the "for" in your second sentence: "Do not simply explain what each stands for", and finish the thought.....like "Do not simply explain what each stands for, instead explain......yada, yada, yada."

Or put a comma or an "and" before the "Do" and put the beginning of your thought there.
 
Back
Top