I was wondering which is the correct form for expressing this simple concept in a formal way: " my hometown is a good place FOR LIVING IN / TO LIVE ".

Grammatically I would say that "my hometown is a good place for living in" is correct, but I see a lot of people that write "my hometown is a good place to live".


"My hometown is a good place for living in."

"My hometown is a good place to live".

They are both grammatically correct and it could be argued that the meaning is the same.

For me there is a difference.

"My hometown is a good place for living in." This means that my hometown has good facilities: cinemas, music venues, sports arenas, restaurants etc. The town supports the everyday activities of living.

"My hometown is a good place to live". This could mean the same but to me it means that it is good because it is in a good location or is situated somewhere important. For example:

"My hometown is a good place to live because it is near the university that I want to attend. I'll be able to visit my parents and friends regularly".

  • I think the second sentence should end with "in" as "live" is used as an intransitive verb. – user140086 Nov 1 '15 at 6:29
  • @Rathony, look at the first 8 book titles in this Google Books search -> google.co.uk/… -> Then page down and keep looking. Although your idea has logic, it doesn't accord with actual usage. – chasly from UK Nov 1 '15 at 8:36
  • I always think we have to distinguish English usages used in "book titles" and "headlines" from normal usages in above sentences. I would say "I am living in London" and "I am living London" have diffrent connotations and "London is a better place to live in" and "London is a better place to live" do, too unless they are written in "book titles". – user140086 Nov 1 '15 at 8:53
  • I only mentioned titles because they came first on that list. If you keep scrolling/paging down the list you will eventually see the same idiom occurring in the body text as well. I'm not saying that a sentence cannot end with "place to live in" because that idiom is used occasionally (usually with in a slightly different meaning). However it isn't idiomatic in this particular case. If you want to discuss it further then I think that would have to be a different question as it is off-topic here. P.S. The idiom applies to to other intransitive verbs as well. – chasly from UK Nov 1 '15 at 9:05
  • 1
    I have just posted it. Please take a look to see if there is any misleading part. Your comment and edition are welcome. – user140086 Nov 1 '15 at 9:47

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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