Reading this post, I realized that I had a tendency to use "typical for" rather than "typical of".
After a quick research, reading through several sources on the web, I found that the more I read, the more I got confused. I felt like there is no established rules to state which one is more appropriate, in which occasion.
I even found the two usages in the same BBC's article,
"The painting is a little a-typical for Van Gogh because of the many people appearing on it but also very typical because of the prominent role for the mill."
"But he added that other elements of the the work, with its bright colours lathered roughly on the canvas, was typical of Van Gogh's style at the time he was living in Paris."
The searches for "typical of" and "typical for" here (EL&U) both returned substantial results, though "typical of" appears to be in favor.
Trying to make sense of it, I was about to conclude that I should use "of" when the typicality is something intrinsic (a property or a character of what was talked about), and use "for" when such typicality should be viewed extrinsically. As these two examples from Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary,
This meal is typical of local cookery. (intrinsic)
A typical working day for me begins at 7.30. (extrinsic)
But soon I felt abash when I found someone mentioned question 7 in this English Grammar Test, Elementary Level # 71,
Such bad behavior is typical .......... the spoiled child.
The question was listed under "british vs. american english", implying that each dialect prefers one usage over another. But I have a feeling that it might turn out to be untrue.
Is there any good rule of thumb for the usage of typical for vs. typical of?