1

I guess the following is grammatically correct.

Patricia is a chef. She is preparing the food for tomorrow's party.

The preposition "for" indicates the reason of her preparing, which is the party.

I guess I could also consider the party the purpose. In contrast, What should I called the food? Is it strange to call food the means to achieve a purpose? Are there any other nouns, which relate to "purpose" or "reason", could be used here?

2
  • 2
    Are you asking about the preposition or the noun? Have you looked at the senses of for in a dictionary and not found any that make sense? Is the woman a chef or a murderer trying to poison someone? What noun other than food did you have in mind? You seem to be asking multiple questions, but none of them are providing enough information to understand what you're actually asking. Try focusing on a single question, and expanding on the context and confusion. Commented Jun 5, 2020 at 3:34
  • I'm preparing food. Why am I preparing food? Because of a party. Therefore I am preparing food for a party. Makes sense. There is an unspoken implication or assumption that parties require food, and it's common to leave those assumptions implied and unspoken if the speaker/writer believe the listener/reader would make the same assumptions. For food to be the means to a party, that would mean you'd be able to setup a buffet and be able to call it party. Honestly, it would probably work.
    – LawrenceC
    Commented Jun 5, 2020 at 16:18

1 Answer 1

1

It isn't unusual at all, it seems like you have only noted one of the dictionary definitions of "for". The one that is pertinent here is:

:as being or constituting
eg. "eggs for breakfast"

The food is for the party in the sense that it is a part of the party.

You might also say:

Patricia is a chef. She is preparing the party food for tomorrow.

This is because the party is part of tomorrow's events.

You must log in to answer this question.

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