You need to be both up for and to it if you want to succeed.

[Glizdka]

Does my sentence make sense to you?

"Just being up for the task isn't enough. You need to be both up for and to it if you want to succeed."

 

[SoothingDave]

No, not really. What do you mean by "up to it?"

 

[Glizdka]

Be up to the task. Skilled enough to do it successfully.

 

[jutfrank]

It makes sense to me. It means you have to be ready and willing to do it as well as capable of doing it.

 

[SoothingDave]

I thought that was what you were meaning. I would reword to be clearer. You must be both up for it and up to it.

 

[Glizdka]

Would it work if I used a noun instead of a pronoun in the sentence?

"We're looking for people up for and to the challenges (...)"

 

[5jj]

You still need to second 'up'.

 

[Glizdka]

Does that mean that "be up for and to" sounds more like a shortened version of "be up for and be to" rather than "be up for and be up to"?

 

[SoothingDave]

Consider "up for" and "up to" to be inseparable phrases.

 

[Glizdka]

How about "You must be up for and up to it"?

 

[SoothingDave]

I would say "you must be both up for..."

 

[jutfrank]

You must be both up for it and up to it.

Don't drop either 'it'.

 

[Glizdka]

I'm testing phrasal verbs with more than one component after the core verb. The idea is that if two such phrasal verbs share one of these components, it should be possible to omit it in sentences with and. Apparently, it isn't.

Now I'll test if which of the two components is shared matters. In "be up for" and "be up to", it's the first component that is shared between the two phrasal verbs. Maybe this prevents omitting it in a sentence with and. What if I tried a pair of phrasal verbs in which it's the second component that is shared between them?

"After a heated argument we had a falling out, but after a few days, I made up and out with her, and we came back to each other."

Does the above sentence work?

 

[Tarheel]

I would say:

We made up with each other and got back together.

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, the sentence is understandable. It's a little playful with the words.

The point we are making is that when you try to break apart phrasal verbs, and distribute* one word across a conjunction, you invite confusion. Which isn't recommended for a learner of a language.

*I mean distribute like in math: 3x + 3y = 3(x + y)

 

[5jj]

The point we are making is that when you try to break apart phrasal verbs, and distribute* one word across a conjunction, you invite confusion. Which isn't recommended for a learner of a language.

Before I went to bed to bed last night, I put the light and the cat out.

 

[Glizdka]

Point taken.