0

Here are two sentences below.

  1. I would have taken a lot for her to say that.
  2. I would have taken her a lot to say that. The position of 'a lot' makes the difference?
2
  • 2
    Do you mean "It would have taken...."? Feb 2, 2021 at 18:04
  • I've answered on the assumption that should be It, not I (the latter simply makes no sense at all). Feb 2, 2021 at 18:18

1 Answer 1

1

1: It would have taken a lot for her to say that.
2: It would have taken her a lot to say that.


The first version is non-specific about who might need to make significant changes in order for something to occur. Perhaps the intended meaning is WE would have to make a lot of effort to get her to say that.

The second version makes it clear that SHE is the one who would have to suffer / make the effort (note that the "suffering" interpretation probably wouldn't make sense unless it was specifically her - not "us", society at large, or whatever).


If you're not interested in that potential distinction, they're equivalent and interchangeable.

You must log in to answer this question.

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