# He had a knack to spot/for spotting things



## ubal

Hi everyone:

What is the different in the use of "to verb+inf" or "for verb+ing"?

Example:

He had a knack *to spot/for spotting* things.


Does it have any explanation about it?


Thank you in advance


----------



## Chris K

There are many threads on the general topic of "to verb+inf" vs. "for verb+ing", for instance, http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1633040. In your specific example, we almost always use "for" after "knack," so it would be followed by the -ing form.

_He had a knack for spotting things._


----------



## St. Nick

Hola

No se diría, "Tenía habilidad dibujar" (infinitivo) sino "Tenia habilidad para dibujar" (en inglés, preposición + gerundio).


----------



## ubal

> Hola
> 
> No se diría, "Tenía habilidad dibujar" (infinitivo) sino "Tenia habilidad para dibujar" (en inglés, preposición + gerundio).



You are too nosy to live. the exactly translation is : estas demasiado entrometido para vivir.

I doesn't have this topic clear. Some other explanation about it.


----------



## ubal

Other example:

He went straight to the third floor *to* head me off.


----------



## blasita

> You are too nosy to live. the exactly translation is : estas demasiado entrometido para vivir.


 Aquí, antes de nada, al menos cambiaría ´Est*á*s´ por _Eres..._

This is an infinitive structure:  _too+adjective_ (He´s *too old to* work.)



> He went straight to the third floor to head me off.


  If I´m not mistaken, this is the _infinitive of purpose_; why did he go straight to the 3rd floor? To (con el fin de/para/con el propósito de) head me off.

Many nouns, verbs and adjectives are normally used with particular prepositions; e.g. _angry *with* somebody, the reason *for*, a knack *for* remembering faces_. Besides, when you use a verb after a preposition, you use -ing forms, not infinitives; e.g. _I look forward *to* meet*ing* you._

This is just an idea.  I recommend that you read carefully all the other threads about infinitives and -ing forms, and come back if you still don´t understand something.  But I wouldn´t rely too much on only translation here, as both can be translated _para._

Please correct me. Hope it helps a bit.  Un saludo .


----------



## donbill

ubal said:


> You are too nosy to live. the exactly translation is : estas demasiado entrometido para vivir.
> 
> I doesn't have this topic clear. Some other explanation about it.



En este contexto,_ Para_ se usa para expresar una comparison implícita: Es muy viejo para este trabajo = He's [too] old for this job; Es alto para su edad = He's tall for his age, etc. En _Estás (¿eres?) demasiado entrometido para vivir_ vemos la misma idea. En inglés tales comparaciones implícitas se expresan con _too/very_ + _adjetivo +  el infinitivo_: He's too old to work, It's too late to start (Es [muy] tarde para empezar), He's too young to die, etc.


----------



## ubal

This is still running in my head because I cannot see the difference between to+verb and for verb+ing.

In this example I guess I have to use *to verb*: The following calculations are an example *to find out* which beam the structure needs...

But I cannot understand why it is of this way.


Thank you for everything


----------



## donbill

ubal said:


> This is still running in my head because I cannot see the difference between to+verb and for verb+ing.
> 
> In this example I guess I have to use *to verb*: The following calculations are an example *to find out* which beam the structure needs...
> 
> But I cannot understand why it is of this way.
> 
> 
> Thank you for everything



I would say an _"example for finding out," "an example that can be used for finding out," "an example that can be used to find out". _*I do not like*_ "an example to find out"._

I'm sure there's a rule that explains the issue, but I don't know it. I'm relying on sound. It seems to me that that the construction with _*to*_ can just about always--maybe always--be changed to _"in order to"_. Doing so may make it correspond more closely to _para + inf_.


----------



## donbill

Hola ubal,

Estoy pensando en tu dilema. Es posible que lo que voy a poner aqui ya se haya dicho en otro hilo.

Recuerda que el gerundio se puede usar como sustantivo y que cuando se usa con _for_ para describir algo, puede significar "una cosa cuyo propósito es"

an example for showing = un ejemplo cuyo propósito es demostrar
a pen for writing on glass
a machine for cutting metal
a knife for carving wood


----------



## blasita

> I'm sure there's a rule that explains the issue, but I don't know it. I'm relying on sound. It seems to me that that the construction with to can just about always--maybe always--be changed to "in order to". Doing so may make it correspond more closely to para + inf.


Yes, I agree that usually to+inf corresponds to para+inf, but what about e.g. _Did you tell her which bus to take?_ (para coger  ??). I may be wrong, though.

Another thought:
_Have you got a key to open this door?_ (purpose: a key to open this door.)
_A key is a piece of metal for closing and opening a lock_ (purpose of the object: what it does.)

Both are translated (if I´m not mistaken: para).  So! I´m trying to ´defend my theory´ that you shouldn´t rely on translations, but understand that there are quite a few rules about infinitives and -ing forms (and suppose, like in all languages, exceptions ).

Un saludito a todos.

Sorry donbill.  I´d already written this post: I agree with your last explanation!


----------



## donbill

blasita said:


> I´m trying to ´defend my theory´ that you shouldn´t rely on translations,



I agree with you 100%--or more! A given language is not meant to be understood in terms of another, and there are very few cases in which an idea in one language can be translated directly into another.

Saludos


----------



## ubal

it is getting clearer but it is still a bit weird. I guess that I need practise in the daily life.
other sentence as example:

I will buy that book t*o learn/for learning* spanish. (purpose: book to learn) spanish)
I'm going back home *to take rest/for taking rest*. ( purpose: take rest at home)


----------



## donbill

ubal said:


> it is getting clearer but it is still a bit weird. I guess that I need practise in the daily life.
> other sentence as example:
> 
> I will buy that book t*o learn/for learning* spanish. (purpose: book to learn) spanish)
> I'm going back home *to take rest/for taking rest*. ( purpose: take rest at home)



I will buy a book to learn Spanish = para aprender español
I will buy a book for learning Spanish = un libro cuyo propósito es el de ayudarme a aprender español

I'm going back home to [take a] rest.
I'M going back for taking rest.


----------



## blasita

> It is getting clearer but it is still a bit weird. I guess that I need practise in the daily life. I agree





> I will buy a book to learn Spanish = para aprender español _(my purpose=learning Spanish; I want to learn this language.)_
> I will buy a book for learning Spanish = un libro cuyo propósito es el de ayudarme a aprender español _(purpose of the book: help me learn Spanish.)_



Ubal, look, I agree with you that it´s not easy to know when we need an infinitive/-ing form.  But please have a look at my examples, clear and beautiful donbill´s examples and explanations, and e.g. this thread (which is quite good!): http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=703560.

Hope it helps.  Un saludo .


----------



## ubal

Thank you for the link I hadn't seen it before and it is quite helpful.

I have seen this sentence and it is other one more for this thread:

Then he could go back *to hating* your father's memory in peace.


----------



## blasita

Lo siento, soy la chica de los ´links´, pero es que aquí lo explican muy bien:  :http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1691348&highlight=go+back+ing.  Also useful: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1386704.

But sure you´ll get an explanation from our foreros if these links don´t answer your question.

Un saludo.


----------



## donbill

ubal said:


> Thank you for the link I hadn't seen it before and it is quite helpful.
> 
> I have seen this sentence and it is other one more for this thread:
> 
> Then he could go back *to hating* your father's memory in peace.



Go back to hating = empezar de nuevo a odiar.


----------



## cirrus

Going back to the original post. Having the knack *to* do something sounds wrong to me. I'd say having the knack *of*. A couple of examples. 
He's been practising all day to make sure he's really got the knack of doing it right. 
He's always getting into fights. He's got the knack of rubbing people up the wrong way.


----------



## blasita

I thought I had it right this time, but there´s no way that a single noun can go with only a preposition ... ??  I´m joking; thanks very much, cirrus, very interesting .

I´ve noticed that in all your examples you say _*the* knack_, and I hope this is the reason why, because I suppose you can say (as in my above example): _a knack for remembering faces_.  Or: _There´s a knack to using something._  But not ´of´ in these sentences then?

Un saludo.


----------



## donbill

blasita said:


> I thought I had it right this time, but there´s no way that a single noun can go with only a preposition ... ??  I´m jocking; thanks very much, cirrus, very interesting .
> 
> I´ve noticed that in all your examples you say _*the* knack_, and I hope this is the reason why, because I suppose you can say (as in my above example): _a knack for remembering faces_.  Or: _There´s a knack to using something._  But not ´of´ in these sentences then?
> 
> Un saludo.




We have a knack for doing something.
There's a knack to doing something.
We have a knack of doing something.

I've heard sentences like, _"I just don't have the knack"_ or _"Wow, you've_ _really got the knack!"_, with no prepositional phrase following. Obviously "the knack *for something*" is understood, and the context makes clear what has been left unstated.


----------



## blasita

> He's been practising all day to make sure he's really got the knack of doing it right.
> He's always getting into fights. He's got the knack of rubbing people up the wrong way.



Thanks very much, donbill . Sorry to be a pain, but then: you can say _have the knack of doing something_ (as above; cirrus I hope you don´t mind it: I´m using your sentences), but not _have a knack of doing something_.  Is this correct? Why _the_ is okay but _a_ is not?

Un saludito.


----------



## cirrus

That's my understanding. I have no idea why it seems to go with a definite article, it's just one of those things.  

The only exception I can imagine is saying to someone you are struggling to do something because there's a knack to it.


----------



## blasita

Thanks, cirrus.

My guess is that we need _the_ because of _of_ (we are kind of defining it).  But this is very likely to be a stupid idea.

But I´m sure you both understand that non-native speakers always try to find a reason (although I know there are not any in most cases). So I´ll just try to remember and use these expressions .  Thank you again, donbill and cirrus.


----------



## donbill

blasita said:


> Thanks very much, donbill . Sorry to be a pain, but then: you can say _have the knack of doing something_ (as above; cirrus I hope you don´t mind it: I´m using your sentences), but not _have a knack of doing something_.  Is this correct? Why _the_ is okay but _a_ is not?
> 
> Un saludito.



"Knack of" sounds strange to me in any context that I can think of. I believe I always use "knack for" and "knack to" as I put in a previous post.

There's another expression--here I go complicating matters again!--that is somewhat similar. I don't know if it's used in BrE.

_I can't get *the hang of* using this machine. I guess I just don't have a knack for it.
This technique doesn't look so hard, but I just can't get *the*__* hang of it*. I just don't have the knack.
_


----------



## blasita

I suppose this is another difference between these varieties of English, then.

About_ get the hang of something_, I think it´s also said in BrE because I´ve heard it many times in London and among my colleagues; it´s just informal, I think. But of course, please correct me if not.

Thanks, donbill .  Un saludo.


----------



## junipo

When I saw the thread title, the first thing I thought was "Don't you mean the knack *of* spotting things?". That would be what you'd hear more often in the UK, and is definitely correct, regardless of what they say in America. But in my opinion there is a difference between "the knack of" and "the knack for" (even if it's not always very closely observed):

"The knack for" = the focus is on the fact that he has a definite skill/ability for carrying out a certain task.

"The knack of" = the focus is on his prevalence for doing it, whether through skill or pure chance.

For example:

You have the knack *for* solving problems = You have a definite skill/ability for solving problems.

You have the knack *of* solving problems = You always seem to solve problems (I'm making no judgement on whether this is through skill or luck).

Going back to the original sentence, it sounds better to me with "of" because the action of "spotting things", rather than being a definite skill, is just something opportune that can happen. Likewise, if someone had the tendency of always being in the right place at the right time, I would be more likely to say that they had the "knack of" doing it, not the "knack for".

Having said all that, in most cases you could use either interchangeably (when a verb follows) and it wouldn't sound strange. In fact, I wouldn't be too surprised if other people even on this side of the Atlantic disagreed with what I wrote above (ya veremos ).

PS. "Get the hang of something" is used everywhere in the English-speaking world, as far as I know.


----------



## blasita

Hello junipo and welcome to the forum.



> When I saw the thread title, the first thing I thought was "Don't you mean the knack of spotting things?". That would be what you'd hear more often in the UK, and is definitely correct, regardless of what they say in America. But in my opinion there is a difference between "the knack of" and "the knack for" (even if it's not always very closely observed):
> 
> "The knack for" = the focus is on the fact that he has a definite skill/ability for carrying out a certain task.
> 
> "The knack of" = the focus is on his prevalence for doing it, whether through skill or pure chance.



Thank you for your contribution here; very clear explanation.

Yes, you know, I think most of us know here that there are quite a few varieties (also in Spanish, of course!) and everyone is just saying what they´d say in their place trying to give a grammatical explanation when possible.  And, as you said, it may also depend on the individual speaker.  Thanks again (very useful for me) .

Un saludo a todos.


----------



## kalamazoo

I would say "A knack FOR [spotting etc]" but "The knack [OF] being able to spot"

I'm sure this will just add to the trans-Atlantic and trans-language confusion!


----------



## donbill

kalamazoo said:


> I would say "A knack FOR [spotting etc]" but "The knack [OF] being able to spot"
> 
> I'm sure this will just add to the trans-Atlantic and trans-language confusion!



I'm sticking to my guns (metaphorically, of course)! I would say "a knack for spotting" and a " the knack for being able to spot".

"A knack of"--regardless of whether it's used with definite or indefinite article--just doesn't sound right to me. Since I'm so sure about the matter, I must right, don't you agree?


----------



## ubal

Wich one would be better of this sentence?

You have not showed me enough *to keep/for keeping* this relationship


----------



## blasita

In my opinion, it´s exactly the same as with _too_ (_He´s too old to.../He´s old enough to..._).  And I suppose here we should use an infinitive structure: _to keep_.
But the expert opinion is about to come... .


----------



## donbill

ubal said:


> Wich one would be better of this sentence?
> 
> You have not showed me enough *to keep/for keeping* this relationship



I don't like this sentence, ubal. There seems to be something  missing.

I'd say, _"You haven't shown me any reason to continue this relationship" or "You haven't shown me any reason for continuing this relationship." _(The first one comes more naturally to me, but I see no difference between them.)

(Blasita, was that expert enough? )


----------



## blasita

> Blasita, was that expert enough?



Well, it wasn´t too bad.


----------



## kalamazoo

Donbill, I also don't like "a knack of."  BUt I think "the knack of" is okay.


----------



## donbill

kalamazoo said:


> Donbill, I also don't like "a knack of."  BUt I think "the knack of" is okay.



 If you say it's okay, I'll accept it.


----------



## blasita

> I also don't like "a knack of."



_Stupidity has *a knack of *getting its way; as we should see if we were not always so much wrapped up in ourselves._ (Albert Camus)

Sorry .


----------



## ubal

Hi I am back again. After reading thousand comment I have a slightly idea about it. but still I sometime I cannot see the difference.

In this example:

I do not have to study too much for doing/to do the test.


----------

