0

There is a confusion regarding the usage of the following words Assault on Assault to Assault for please give example to explain the same

Improve this question
1
  • 1
    What confusion? Please provide full sentences.
    – Jason Bassford
    Commented Feb 26, 2019 at 20:30

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

First, assault is both a noun and a verb. As a verb, it can be both transitive and intransitive, according to Webster's New World Dictionary, Fourth Edition.

He committed assault.

I was assaulted by her.

He committed assault on Wednesday. (Ha! That is bit of linguistic fun using the words "assault on"; one doesn't really commit assault "on" someone; they just assault him or her. But see the example below.)

Basically, the pronouns cited in the question do not really work with "assault" except in special circumstances. Here are some examples:

He committed assault on a teacher. This is the way a legal citation might be worded.

He committed assault by threatening the teacher with a gun.

"Assault to" and "Assault for" are unusual phrasing in the normal sense of the action of assault. However, I can construct a sentence that uses assault for in this sense:

He was charged with assault for the threat he made against the teacher.

Improve this answer
2
  • How about "He commited assault to get revenge" and "He commited assault for the purposes of robbery". Both strained I admit but they are possible.
    – BoldBen
    Commented Feb 27, 2019 at 3:11
  • Absolutely, good examples. I realize now that the OP's words (to, for) could fit if the clause following assault starts with an infinitive or an explanation. There could even be "assault while" and "assault in" -- "He committed assault while in jail" and "he committed assault in front of the entire school."
    – user8356
    Commented Feb 27, 2019 at 14:12

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .