0

  1. Those who missed the 20 years of the show, this is a very rare footage.

  2. ‘For’ those who missed the 20 years of the show, this is a very rare footage.

Does the ‘for’ in the second sentence sound odd or not?

Improve this question
4
  • Source please. Where did you get these sentences?
    – James K
    Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 18:07
  • I don't think any native speaker would be likely to omit for in this context. And certainly from the "formal syntax" perspective, it would be completely ungrammatical to do so. Regardless of whether the adverbial clause appears before OR after the primary statement (this is very rare footage), it should start with a preposition. And speaking for myself, I really don't like the article in a rare footage - to me it's on a par with a software (which I'd say always implies "non-native speaker").
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 18:09
  • "footage" is definitely uncountable, must be "this is very rare footage".
    – jonathanjo
    Commented Jan 9, 2020 at 12:13
  • The footage is either rare or it's not. If it's rare then it's still rare even if you've seen the last 20 years of the show. You want to say something more like, "For those who missed the last 20 years of the show, this is footage you might never have seen before."
    – rjpond
    Commented Oct 11, 2020 at 11:11

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

No, actually. In fact, the "for" in the beginning sounds very natural, and better than missing it out.

It would make sense to skip the "for" if you're saying something like "those who missed the 20 years of the show have been sitting under a rock".

"For those" indicates something more like a disclaimer or message to the people who missed the 20 years of the show. So for makes more sense in this case, like: "For those who didn't watch the 20 years of the show, this is very rare footage."

Improve this answer
4
  • The first sentence is bad, and lacks the 'for', which is necessary.
    – Michael Harvey
    Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 18:27
  • @MichaelHarvey what do you mean??
    – michael griffin
    Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 19:12
  • Sentence (1) in the OP's question does not make sense.
    – Michael Harvey
    Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 19:43
  • true. and I changed to make it make sense without a "for" although it does state a different message.
    – michael griffin
    Commented Jan 8, 2020 at 20:09

You must log in to answer this question.

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