For your perusal and evaluation, I have enclosed my curriculum vitae for further information.

My main problem with this sentence is the double usage of the word for. My idea was to replace it with with, would that be better?

Just clarifying: This is at the end of paragraph in which I describe my skills and such.

  • As both existing answers indicate, if you're looking for writing advice, you'd probably do better simply discarding your first clause (For your perusal and evaluation). But sticking to the specific question asked, the answer is yes - you can validly replace your second for with the word with (or perhaps better, containing). Commented Mar 28, 2013 at 12:34
  • This doesn’t read very well because of the two (‘for’) prepositions. See the answer by @StoneyB Commented Mar 28, 2013 at 18:16
  • 1
    I think the sentence reads awkwardly, but certainly not because the word for is used twice. Plenty of sentences can use the same preposition more than once without distracting the reader.
    – J.R.
    Commented Mar 28, 2013 at 18:37

2 Answers 2


As it stands, the second for does make it seem an afterthought, which would have led a more careful writer to revise the sentence.

But it is difficult to imagine a context in which both For your perusal and evaluation and for further information would not be superfluous: why else would you enclose your CV? what else would they do with it?

I suggest that a bare I enclose my curriculum vitae tells your correspondents everything they need to know about the document, without impertinently restricting their use of it or suggesting that they require instruction in its use.

  • I would totally agree, however, I have to write a letter for an assignment at school, and big words are endorsed, no matter how stupid they sound. I thought this was borderline ok, but I agree. I might completely get rid of it. Commented Mar 28, 2013 at 18:14

You could just end without it. It makes perfect sense:

For your perusal and evaluation, I have enclosed my curriculum vitae.

In this context, for further information seems redundant.

You must log in to answer this question.

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