1

I'm watching the famous TV show, “Desperate Housewives”.  I have learned a plethora of words and grammar things from it, but now something caught my ears and I'm a bit stuck.  There's this sentence in season 2, episode 6:

"-My friends just left, and I was hoping you could come over and cut me out of this thing [dress]. " "-How was your little reunion?" "-It was, um -- weird." -"Weird?" -"Well, Allison's mad because she's losing jobs for 14-year-olds, Holly is on a strict diet of cruciferous vegetables, and Yazmin is undergoing a new embryonic facial treatment that probably causes short-term-memory loss. I just stood there the whole night, trying to remember why we were ever friends. And I couldn't"

My question is, should it not be to instead of for in the above dialogue? I've googled it already, and I found only examples that bolster my assumption.

Dear natives, please enlighten me why for is used here.

  • Not a native, but most prepositions are fixed combinations, and most of them stick to English usage, making them sound idiomatic. – Alejandro Oct 7 '18 at 19:32
  • We need the context. Is she an employer who wanted to hire 14 year-olds but now cannot? Or was she competing for a job against a 14 year-old who ended up getting the job instead of her? – Jim Oct 7 '18 at 19:36
  • "-My friends just left, and I was hoping you could come over and cut me out of this thing [dress]. " "-How was your little reunion?" "-It was, um -- weird." -"Weird?" -"Well, Allison's mad because she's losing jobs for 14-year-olds, Holly is on a strict diet of cruciferous vegetables, and Yazmin is undergoing a new embryonic facial treatment that probably causes short-term-memory loss. I just stood there the whole night, trying to remember why we were ever friends. And I couldn't" – zoli Oct 7 '18 at 19:45
  • 1
    I don't agree with Robusto here. The preposition for is often used to denote a beneficiary - someone who gains from something, or to indicate a meaning similar to because, or to indicate a replacement of some sort (I swapped apples for oranges). I think one of these two is the reason for is used here. – Araucaria Oct 7 '18 at 22:44
  • 1
    The statement is still ambiguous. It could be saying that she's taking jobs away from 14-year-olds, that 14-year-olds are getting jobs instead of her, or that she's failing to get jobs that are meant to be handled by 14-year-olds. We don't know who any of these people are or what the larger context is. – Jason Bassford Oct 8 '18 at 1:43

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.