“Restricted for” or “restricted to”?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Is this sentence valid?
Access to this content is restricted for our subscribers
or should it be:
Access to this content is restricted to our subscribers
grammar prepositions
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Is this sentence valid?
Access to this content is restricted for our subscribers
or should it be:
Access to this content is restricted to our subscribers
grammar prepositions
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Both sentences are fine, but they mean different things.
– Mark Beadles
2 hours ago
yes what's the meaning of the first? I want to say that only subscribers can access the content
– Joanna Mikalai
1 hour ago
"restricted for" means something like "restricted for the benefit of, or on behalf of" our subscribers. But if you want to say "Only subscribers can access this content", why not just say that? There is no reason you have to phrase it as a passive.
– Mark Beadles
1 hour ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Is this sentence valid?
Access to this content is restricted for our subscribers
or should it be:
Access to this content is restricted to our subscribers
grammar prepositions
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Is this sentence valid?
Access to this content is restricted for our subscribers
or should it be:
Access to this content is restricted to our subscribers
grammar prepositions
grammar prepositions
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
edited 1 hour ago
Laurel
28.8k654103
28.8k654103
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
asked 2 hours ago
Joanna Mikalai
101
101
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Both sentences are fine, but they mean different things.
– Mark Beadles
2 hours ago
yes what's the meaning of the first? I want to say that only subscribers can access the content
– Joanna Mikalai
1 hour ago
"restricted for" means something like "restricted for the benefit of, or on behalf of" our subscribers. But if you want to say "Only subscribers can access this content", why not just say that? There is no reason you have to phrase it as a passive.
– Mark Beadles
1 hour ago
add a comment |
2
Both sentences are fine, but they mean different things.
– Mark Beadles
2 hours ago
yes what's the meaning of the first? I want to say that only subscribers can access the content
– Joanna Mikalai
1 hour ago
"restricted for" means something like "restricted for the benefit of, or on behalf of" our subscribers. But if you want to say "Only subscribers can access this content", why not just say that? There is no reason you have to phrase it as a passive.
– Mark Beadles
1 hour ago
2
2
Both sentences are fine, but they mean different things.
– Mark Beadles
2 hours ago
Both sentences are fine, but they mean different things.
– Mark Beadles
2 hours ago
yes what's the meaning of the first? I want to say that only subscribers can access the content
– Joanna Mikalai
1 hour ago
yes what's the meaning of the first? I want to say that only subscribers can access the content
– Joanna Mikalai
1 hour ago
"restricted for" means something like "restricted for the benefit of, or on behalf of" our subscribers. But if you want to say "Only subscribers can access this content", why not just say that? There is no reason you have to phrase it as a passive.
– Mark Beadles
1 hour ago
"restricted for" means something like "restricted for the benefit of, or on behalf of" our subscribers. But if you want to say "Only subscribers can access this content", why not just say that? There is no reason you have to phrase it as a passive.
– Mark Beadles
1 hour ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
The first sentence ("restricted for") means that subscribers may not access the content. It implies, but does not absolutely say, that non-subscribers may access the content. This would be an unusual scenario.
The second sentence ("restricted to") means that subscribers, and only subscribers, may access the content.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Both sentences are valid, though the second one is what you'd more likely encounter.
The first sentence implies that by being a subscriber, you are having your access restricted. The only scenario I can think of where this would be used would be in the case of a content filtering service, where a subscriber is explicitly prohibited from viewing certain content. Even then, it's a confusing way to word the concept.
The second sentence makes more sense, and implies that access to the content is only available to those who subscribe.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
The first sentence ("restricted for") means that subscribers may not access the content. It implies, but does not absolutely say, that non-subscribers may access the content. This would be an unusual scenario.
The second sentence ("restricted to") means that subscribers, and only subscribers, may access the content.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The first sentence ("restricted for") means that subscribers may not access the content. It implies, but does not absolutely say, that non-subscribers may access the content. This would be an unusual scenario.
The second sentence ("restricted to") means that subscribers, and only subscribers, may access the content.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
The first sentence ("restricted for") means that subscribers may not access the content. It implies, but does not absolutely say, that non-subscribers may access the content. This would be an unusual scenario.
The second sentence ("restricted to") means that subscribers, and only subscribers, may access the content.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The first sentence ("restricted for") means that subscribers may not access the content. It implies, but does not absolutely say, that non-subscribers may access the content. This would be an unusual scenario.
The second sentence ("restricted to") means that subscribers, and only subscribers, may access the content.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
answered 1 hour ago
Laurelyn
211
211
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Laurelyn is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
add a comment |
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
The first sentence says that subscribers have some restriction regarding access, such as that there is some content that they can't access. It doesn't mean that all content is unavailable to them.
– Acccumulation
51 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Both sentences are valid, though the second one is what you'd more likely encounter.
The first sentence implies that by being a subscriber, you are having your access restricted. The only scenario I can think of where this would be used would be in the case of a content filtering service, where a subscriber is explicitly prohibited from viewing certain content. Even then, it's a confusing way to word the concept.
The second sentence makes more sense, and implies that access to the content is only available to those who subscribe.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Both sentences are valid, though the second one is what you'd more likely encounter.
The first sentence implies that by being a subscriber, you are having your access restricted. The only scenario I can think of where this would be used would be in the case of a content filtering service, where a subscriber is explicitly prohibited from viewing certain content. Even then, it's a confusing way to word the concept.
The second sentence makes more sense, and implies that access to the content is only available to those who subscribe.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Both sentences are valid, though the second one is what you'd more likely encounter.
The first sentence implies that by being a subscriber, you are having your access restricted. The only scenario I can think of where this would be used would be in the case of a content filtering service, where a subscriber is explicitly prohibited from viewing certain content. Even then, it's a confusing way to word the concept.
The second sentence makes more sense, and implies that access to the content is only available to those who subscribe.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Both sentences are valid, though the second one is what you'd more likely encounter.
The first sentence implies that by being a subscriber, you are having your access restricted. The only scenario I can think of where this would be used would be in the case of a content filtering service, where a subscriber is explicitly prohibited from viewing certain content. Even then, it's a confusing way to word the concept.
The second sentence makes more sense, and implies that access to the content is only available to those who subscribe.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
answered 4 mins ago
Duncan Beard
1
1
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Duncan Beard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Joanna Mikalai is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473317%2frestricted-for-or-restricted-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Both sentences are fine, but they mean different things.
– Mark Beadles
2 hours ago
yes what's the meaning of the first? I want to say that only subscribers can access the content
– Joanna Mikalai
1 hour ago
"restricted for" means something like "restricted for the benefit of, or on behalf of" our subscribers. But if you want to say "Only subscribers can access this content", why not just say that? There is no reason you have to phrase it as a passive.
– Mark Beadles
1 hour ago