0

There's a precedent for well-bred girls addicted to the paranormal.

I get the feeling that after the 'girls' you should say 'to have addicted' instead of the past verb 'addicted'.

And if you want to stick to the 'addicted', you should switch 'precedent for' into 'precedent of'. Then we can see 'addicted' as a past participles, not a verb.

Am I right? If not, please correct me.

2 Answers 2

0

The "full" sentence is:

There's a precedent for well-bred girls who are addicted to the paranormal


Hopefully I am not (very) wrong about the difference "precedent for / of".

You will use "precedent for" when you intend to describe a situation which can have a precedent.

There is a precedent for crime.

You will use "precedent of" when you want to give an example of a precedent.

There is a precedent of a president having an affair with an employee.

0
2

The sentence is fine.

The structures like

There is a precedent for somebody who ...

There are (several) precedents for somebody who ...

are pretty common.

There's a precedent for well-bred girls (who are) addicted to the paranormal.

You must log in to answer this question.

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