This is my first post ever on this valuable forum!
I'm at a loss, since I'm supposed correct students' exams, and I started doubting the grammar book's normatively exclusive use of the combination precondition + for, as in
"A halt to the fighting is a precondition for negotiations." (Dictionary.cambridge.org)
Obviously this seems to be the preferred option and "the most correct" (if there is such a thing), but a little google searching shows that two other prepositions are frequently used with the noun precondition, namely of and to, for example in:
"They insist on a guarantee as a precondition of the deal." (Merriam-Webster.com)
“But what I am saying is that for me, at least, feeling loved and wanted by somebody was a precondition to health.” (Dictionary.com, originally from The Daily Beast)
It seems that the online dictionaries or forums do not address the issue of the preposition, apart from one post here that deals with the word prerequisite, which was interesting, but not necessarily fully satisfactory.
So my question is: what is the difference in meaning when using different prepositions, if any?
Since precondition is such a versatile word, are there some contexts, in which one of the three prepositions (for, of, to) would be less than preferred? I'm especially interested in learning if the normative for would not be preferred in certain contexts.
Thank you already in advance for this answer and the countless answers that this forum has provided me in the past!