"to+verb" and "for verb+ing" are usually used to express the purpose of an action.
So how should I decide which one to use?
For example,
The scientist has developed X to predict the movement of Y.
The scientist has developed X for predict the movement of Y.
Which one is correct? Or both of them correct and sound good?
GMAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
- Hei
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
i'm assuming that you meant to write 'for predicting' in your second sentence. (as written, that sentence is, of course, totally wrong.)
as written, with zero context, both of those sentences are fine - i.e., both of those idiomatic constructions work. however, there is sometimes a slight difference between the usages of the two:
'TO (infinitive)' usually implies that whatever you're talking about is sufficient to do whatever task you're referring to. 'FOR (gerund)', on the other hand, merely implies that whatever you're talking about is involved in the task, but isn't necessarily sufficient to complete it.
examples:
this machine is designed for predicting the weather --> the machine is used in some aspect(s) of weather prediction - it may record certain data, etc. - but it can't predict the weather by itself.
this machine is designed to predict the weather --> the machine actually predicts the weather by itself.
i won't say that this distinction holds all the time (i'm sure one could conjure some context in which it doesn't).
additionally, official problems are of course context-free (they're single sentences), so you probably won't be called upon to recognize the difference in meaning anyway.
as written, with zero context, both of those sentences are fine - i.e., both of those idiomatic constructions work. however, there is sometimes a slight difference between the usages of the two:
'TO (infinitive)' usually implies that whatever you're talking about is sufficient to do whatever task you're referring to. 'FOR (gerund)', on the other hand, merely implies that whatever you're talking about is involved in the task, but isn't necessarily sufficient to complete it.
examples:
this machine is designed for predicting the weather --> the machine is used in some aspect(s) of weather prediction - it may record certain data, etc. - but it can't predict the weather by itself.
this machine is designed to predict the weather --> the machine actually predicts the weather by itself.
i won't say that this distinction holds all the time (i'm sure one could conjure some context in which it doesn't).
additionally, official problems are of course context-free (they're single sentences), so you probably won't be called upon to recognize the difference in meaning anyway.
2 posts Page 1 of 1