I read a sentence in "The Hindu" which was:
Whiile Mr Modi said that Congress is trying to erase evidence on the attack.....
My personal preference would be to use "of" instead of "on" after the word "evidence".
-
It's a mistake. It has to be "evidence of" something. You should understand by now that The Hindu often has small mistakes.– jonathanjoCommented May 20, 2019 at 18:27
-
@Kelvin, You are correct. You can post an answer to your own question :)– laugh salutes Monica CCommented May 20, 2019 at 19:08
-
But I get that sense of confirmation only from you guys. ☺☺– KelvinCommented May 21, 2019 at 2:16
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
"Evidence of" [something] is correct. You should say 'evidence of the attack' rather than 'evidence on the attack'.
There is a possible use of "evidence on", in the context of "I've got evidence on you" (colloquial) which means something like: I know something incriminating about you [and I'm threatening to use it against you].
If Congress is pretending that the attack never happened, evidence of is correct, and I would not use any other phrase.
If Congress concedes that there was an attack, but is trying to suppress the details and shift blame, I might use evidence on; but I'd prefer evidence relating to as clearer, or at least more idiomatic (to an American).
