reasons that justify a statement as distinct from giving a reason for it

Question

Microsoft® Encarta® 2009 reads as follows

Because and for are both used to introduce reasons that justify a
statement as distinct from giving a reason for it:
You must have forgotten to invite them, because they didn't turn up.
He blushed, for he knew he had been caught out.

Using the same two examples above, how would I "give a reason for a statement" instead?

James D · Answer

The quote appears to illustrate the two types of "reasons" one could give when making a statement:

The justification or evidence that the speaker has for making the statement.
A reason that the stated phenomenon has occurred.

Thus, in the first example, the speaker explains what evidence led her to conclude that the invitation was forgotten:
(1) You must have forgotten to invite them [statement], because they didn't turn up [justification or evidence for the stated conclusion].
While in the second example, the speaker is explaining why the phenomenon that she is describing (blushing, in this case) has occurred:
(2) He blushed [statement], for he knew he had been caught out [reason for the blushing].

The following would be examples of the other type of reason for each of these statements:
(1) You must have forgotten to invite them [statement] because you have been so busy at work [reason for the forgetfulness].
(2) He blushed [statement], for I could feel the warmth in his cheeks [justification or evidence for my stated conclusion].

Because and for can each be used for either of these distinct types of reasons.

reasons that justify a statement as distinct from giving a reason for it

One Answer

Add your own answers!

Ask a Question