I know that "responsible for" is common but I wonder what happens if I say, "Hitler is responsible of the massacre of Jews"?

I think that when one blames someone for something, using "of" makes sense.

My mother-language is not English but somehow "responsible of" makes more sense to me than the "responsible for".

Or I am just talking with no sense?


It is "responsible for something" and "responsible to someone". How "responsible" is constructed in other languages is irrelevant. http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/responsible


I think that usually

"of" - tends to be used as a possessive identifier as in "son of Sam" while "for" - can act as a helping verb (for doing this thing/that thing where the doing part is implied), as well as acting as a possessive identifier as in "a gift for Sally" (maybe possessive identifier isn't exactly the right part of speech here but it does indicate a sort of possessiveness - Sally must be the owner of the gift if it is for her)

Your Answer

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