My flight is scheduled for 7 p.m. from New York.

My flight is scheduled for New York at 7 p.m.

My flight is scheduled for New York, 7 p.m.

  • Only the first is unambiguous.
    – Erik Kowal
    Dec 23, 2014 at 6:11
  • 2, 3. "scheduled for New York" --> will depart for NY, not from .
    – Kris
    Dec 23, 2014 at 7:37
  • But word order makes all the difference. For instance, "My flight is scheduled for New York at 7 p.m." becomes unambiguous if you reorder it thus: "My flight for New York is scheduled at/for 7 p.m."
    – Erik Kowal
    Dec 23, 2014 at 8:38
  • @Kris My flight is scheduled from New York at 7 p.m. My flight is scheduled for 7 p.m. from New York. are same meaning? thanks in advance.
    – danny rhee
    Dec 23, 2014 at 10:24
  • Yes, the phrase from New York can move; for is preferable over at as a collocation for scheduled. By the way, what exactly is troubling you? Can you add more details as to why you are asking so can help better?
    – Kris
    Dec 23, 2014 at 14:26

2 Answers 2


They could have the same meaning, depending upon context. Generally, though, the latter two (..."for New York") are slightly more ambiguous, as it's not clear whether the flight is originating in New York, or whether it is terminating there. There is less ambiguity in the first choice.


One cannot tell whether they have the same meaning, because none of them are clear enough; mainly because none specifies whether the time mentioned is a departure or arrival time. To make it clear, include "scheduled to depart" or "scheduled to arrive". (That is, if you actually want to be met at your destination city, when you arrive, rather than at your departure city, when you depart.) If your flight is bound "for" New York, it would be clear to say "my flight TO New York". (These are not the kind of instructions you would give to someone you wanted to drop you off at the airport; they know which city you are departing from.)

  • I've never hear anyone say "My flight is scheduled for [time] from [place]" when they actually meant "The arrival of my flight from [place] is scheduled to occur at [time]". (I'd wager that you haven't either.) Whenever someone says "My flight is scheduled for [time] ... ", they always mean "My flight is scheduled to depart at [time].
    – Erik Kowal
    Dec 24, 2014 at 3:51
  • Well, since the three sentences mix "from New York" and "for New York", some refer implicitly to departing from New York, and some to arriving there. They are not different ways of saying the same thing; they are vague, ambiguous ways of saying two different things. One says a flight departs "from", one does not say it departs "for" (not without specifying a destination.) Dec 24, 2014 at 4:03
  • On that point I agree (see my comments under the OP's question).
    – Erik Kowal
    Dec 24, 2014 at 4:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.