for me to find out

English grammar questions, answered by Alan

Moderator: Alan

Locked
azz
Rising Star
Rising Star
Posts: 296
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 12:50 pm

for me to find out

Post by azz »

We were playing poker. I thought my opponent was bluffing. But my hand was so bad that even if he was bluffing, I'd have probably lost. So when he raised, I folded, although I thought he was very likely bluffing.

Can I say
a. My hand wasn't good enough to find out whether he was bluffing.
instead of
b. My hand wasn't good enough for me to find out whether he was bluffing.
?

One could argue that in (a) my hand is supposed to find out whether he was bluffing or not. I think sentences like (a) are used and convey the correct meaning.


Many thanks
User avatar
Alan
Teacher/Moderator
Teacher/Moderator
Posts: 15162
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 7:56 pm
Status: Teacher of English
Location: Japan

Re: for me to find out

Post by Alan »

Yes, the sentence as it stands is grammatical and comprehensible but, for clarity, it is generally advisable to specify the doer by means of the for-phrase.
Locked