1

I'm confused about how a placement of "only" can change the meaning of a sentence.

A real life text from the document I'm working on:

If possible, use the shorthand syntax: # for an ID, . for a role, % for each value of the option attribute (which is used for only tables), x*y for consecutive table column specifiers.

If possible, use the shorthand syntax: # for an ID, . for a role, % for each value of the option attribute (which is used only for tables), x*y for consecutive table column specifiers.

The reality is that option attribute cannot be used with anything except tables. For instance, you cannot use it with lists or images.

I'm concerned that one of the versions above actually tells something different: that "We are talking about the cases where options attribute is applied to tables. However, it can be used with, for example, lists or images as well. The use of options attribute is not limited to tables."

Is it correct to say that "for only" and "only for" have different meaning? Which version is correct here?

1
  • 2
    For only does NOT work. The only correct constructions are only for tables or for tables only. Nov 20 '20 at 23:14
3

"(which is used for only tables)" is sufficiently unnatural that I would call it just wrong, particularly in US technical English (but I suspect in other forms as well)

Here I would use "(which is used only for tables)" invariably. A comment suggests "(which is used for tables only)". This is acceptable, but in my experience is less common.

I can't cite a more general rule of which this is an example.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.