A prepositional phrase is made up of a preposition and a noun phrase. We use prepositional phrases for many purposes, for example:

- as adverbials of time and place:

We will be back in a few days.
They drove to Glasgow

.- as a postmodifier in a noun phrase:

Helen is the girl in the red dress
We’ve got a new television with a thirty one inch screen.

- to show who did something:

The lion was killed by the hunter
I saw a wonderful painting by Van Gogh

- with double object verbs like give and get:

We gave five pounds to the woman on the corner.
They got a drink for me.

- after certain verbs, nouns and adjectives:

The book belongs to me.
I had an argument with my brother.
I feel sorry for you.



It is advantageous for me to go there.
It is advantageous to me.
It is advantageous for me.
My grammar checking tool is showing that "to" can't be used in place of "for" in the first sentence; However, it has no problem with the third sentence. Would somebody explain the logic behind this?

Hi sam61,

I think both for and to are possible in the first sentence. For is more common, I would say, but both are correct.

Like online translators, grammar checking tools can be helpful but are quite blunt instruments and will often offer questionable advice.



The LearnEnglish Team

When we write about ranges we use both 'from' and 'to'. And sometimes 'to' only.
They used to pay him twenty to thirty dollars.
They used to pay him from twenty to thirty dollars.
How do we decide when to use both 'from' and 'to' and when to use only 'to'?

Hi naghmairam,

There is no difference in meaning. In informal conversation the 'from' can be omitted without changing the meaning of the sentence.



The LearnEnglish Team

Is there a difference between 'price of' and price for'?
What is the difference in meaning in the following sentences?
They have fixed a price of everything.
They have fixed a price for everything.


Hello Naghma

In standard British English, 'price of' and 'price for' are both correct, but are used in different situations. In this case, the second sentence is correct, but the first is not.

'price of' is probably more common. When we use this phrase, we are speaking about how much money we have to pay to get something -- for example, 'The price of this car is £6,000.'

We use 'price for' not to talk about a numerical price, but rather what is exchanged to get something. For example, 'After a lot of haggling, we agreed on a price for the car'. We also often say 'for the price', for example, 'Don't miss today's special offer -- get two doughnuts for the price of one!'

I hope that clears it up for you.

All the best


The LearnEnglish Team

Should we use 'to' or 'for' in the following sentence? What is the difference between 'to' and 'for' as a preposition?
It was important to Jim.
It was important for Jim.

Hi Naghma,

Both are possible and without a context it's not possible to say which is better.

We use important to to describe something of value to us.

We use important for to describe something that we need.


Of course, some things both have value and are needed, so then we have a choice of which to use.



The LearnEnglish Team

In the sentence below, Arsenal has the point of 1 or 0? what does 'to Arsenal' mean? for example, Arsenal is mentioned here as 'the opponent' or 'the host'? could you please explain for me? thanks.

1. At half-time in the game, the score is 1-0 to Arsenal.

Hello sword_yao

It means that Arsenal are winning, i.e. in this kind of report, 'to' followed by a team's name means that the team mentioned are winning.

In this kind of sentence, it's not clear which team is the away team and which is the home. In written reports (e.g. in newspapers), the home team's score goes first and then the away team's score second. I'm not sure who the other team are here, but, for example, if it were Liverpool and the game was in Liverpool, then in writing it would be Liverpool 0 Arsenal 1 (not 'Arsenal 1 Liverpool 0', which would indicate the match was played in London).

All the best


The LearnEnglish Team