Can I expect someone to call me at 10:30? Why "for me" not "for you"?

  • 1
    A bounds statement implies exclusivity(no you should not expect a call at 10:30). 'For you' would certainly be bad English, as then the question would read 'Is it ok for you to call you at this time?' 'For me' though is redundant, because the implication unless explicitly stated is that the verb(in this case call) connects the speaker and the intended recipient. That is to say 'Would tomorrow between 11:30 & 12:00am be ok to call?' has the same meaning, no 'for me' or 'give you' is necessary, it's just 'fluff.'
    – Giu Piete
    Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 19:41
  • 6
    Pet peeve: between 11:30 and 12:00 or from 11:30 to 12:00, but never between 11:30 to 12:00, please.
    – Davo
    Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 20:05
  • 2
    What sentence are you asking about? The one in the title or the one in the body of the question (which doesn't actually contain for me)? In the title, for me is bizarre because you should already know if it works (for you) or not. It only makes sense to use use for you, as a question, if you don't know if it works for them or not. Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 20:29
  • 1
    @Barmar For it to be interpreted that way, the wording work for me would have to be changed. If something works for me, that means it's convenient for me. If it doesn't work for me, then it's not a possible time—for me. (Both of your alternate sentences are fine—just not the one in the question title.) Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 23:56
  • 1
    It's ambiguous, it can be parsed either way. He didn't intend it as "(work for me) to call you", it's intended as "work (for me to call you)".
    – Barmar
    Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 23:58

2 Answers 2


The caller is asking whether it would be convenient to you (as the proposed recipient of the call) to be calleis d by the person adking the question somewhere between 11:30am and 12:00 am.

The reason they are saying "...convenient for me to give you a call" is that they actually mean "Would it be convenient if I gave you a call..?" They are not asking whether it would be convenient for them, they would know that.

The phraseology is quite poor and somewhat unclear but this sort of convolution is quite common in normal speech. If they had actually said "Would it be convenient for you if I gave you a call between 11:30 and 12:00?" You would not have a problem and would not, unless you responded negatively and asked them to call earlier, expect call at 10:30


Time ranges are exclusive so no they wouldn't call at 10:30 (but they might call at 11:30 or 12:00 or anywhere in between).

"For me" is there as part of the action "for me to give you a call" not asking if it would "work for me". It's awkwardly phrased.

  • 1
    Another possibility that the caller is expecting the call to last from 11:30 to 12:00 at the latest (as opposed to them calling at 12:00). In other words, the range indicates a block of time rather than potential start times. Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 22:09
  • 2
    @Chemomechanics Either way, 10:30 is not included.
    – Barmar
    Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 22:59
  • 1
    Even more awkward would be "work for you for me to give you a call".
    – Barmar
    Commented Mar 13, 2019 at 23:01
  • @Barmar That is actually what I was about to suggest. It’s definitely more cumbersome, but it is also clearer and more natural to me. Where the original is awkward and misleading almost to the point of ungrammaticality for me, this version is clumsy but at least unambiguously grammatical. Commented Mar 14, 2019 at 0:16
  • 2
    @JanusBahsJacquet As I mentioned in a comment above, I think common sense disambiguates it, and I don't consider it too unclear. English is full of garden-path sentences and we usually understand them.
    – Barmar
    Commented Mar 14, 2019 at 0:20

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.