Timeline for "Exchanged with" vs. "exchanged for"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2011 at 2:21 | history | edited | FumbleFingers | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 273 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2011 at 18:45 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | @Rhodri: I think this is rather too subtle a point to expect we should find dictionary definitions making the distinction. I personally produced 'definitions' which may or may not be the end of the story, but the reason for making those distinctions is a combination of 'gut feel' and cursory analysis of other people's written usage. And as pointed out, exchanges involving named people (either as 'agents' or barter objects) are a small proportion of all references. So they won't significantly affect the graph, even though they're relevant to the more precise distinctions. | |
| Jun 22, 2011 at 18:37 | history | edited | FumbleFingers | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 746 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2011 at 18:14 | comment | added | user1579 | Sorry, I meant to ask if you could cite sources on the definitions you give for "exchanged with" and "exchanged for", that would be very useful for the future. I should probably have also been clearer that in both "exchange with someone" and "exchange for someone", the person is participating in the exchange, not being exchanged. These are common usages, and may be messing up your Ngrams. | |
| Jun 22, 2011 at 18:03 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | @Rhodri: as @Ham and Bacon noted, it's an NGram graph. I just spent a couple of minutes leafing through a few pages of the reported instances in their indexed books to confirm what I already suspected. Of all things that may be exchanged, 'people' aren't particularly common. So I didn't consider that special difference, because OP only seems to be asking about standard usage for standard situations. Perhaps I should add that subtle distinction anyway - I just didn't want to confuse the issue first time around. | |
| Jun 22, 2011 at 11:56 | comment | added | user1579 | Any references for those usage definitions? They sound very plausible, but some backup would be nice. I might also be worth mentioning that "exchange with someone" and "exchange for someone" have entirely different meanings. | |
| Jun 22, 2011 at 11:01 | comment | added | Thursagen | @krubo Google Ngrams | |
| Jun 22, 2011 at 3:45 | comment | added | krubo | That's an awesome graph - how did you get it? | |
| Jun 22, 2011 at 1:40 | history | answered | FumbleFingers | CC BY-SA 3.0 |