I guess that makes sense because if I were paying for beans with meat, that means I’m trading meat for beans but “trading for” means the other way so I’m still kinda confused 😵💫
I’ll trade you my English skills for a sac of beans 🫘
I agree with you. I don’t know about “wrong” but the title is ambiguous. A post on stackexchange does not make something a rule, though there may be conventions for this with some people or in some regions that are strong enough to convince some people that there is one.
“for” usually means the first thing is replacing the second. If it said “with” than it’d go the other way
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/23360/substitute-x-for-y
Interesting 🤔
I guess that makes sense because if I were paying for beans with meat, that means I’m trading meat for beans but “trading for” means the other way so I’m still kinda confused 😵💫
I’ll trade you my English skills for a sac of beans 🫘
Yeah English prepositions can be a little weird sometimes like that
I refuse to accept this. The title is wrong.
I agree with you. I don’t know about “wrong” but the title is ambiguous. A post on stackexchange does not make something a rule, though there may be conventions for this with some people or in some regions that are strong enough to convince some people that there is one.
The title is still wrong. The stackexchange post is about the verbs to replace and to exchange not to swap.