I always thought the the right way to speak this would certainly be to usage for insdead the in. Are both versions correct? would there it is in a distinction in meaning?
I"m trying to record a faint idea floating in mine head. Not sure I can define adequately.
You are watching: Haven t heard from you in awhile
First off, both "in a while" and "for a while" space grammatical and idiomatic every se. However, to me, "for a while" would mean that their hearing from friend is an ongoing process, which you interrupted for some time— or well, for a while—, yet then resumed. I beg your pardon is no what the sentence is claimed to express.
What girlfriend want rather is "in a while", i m sorry also method "for some period of time" however without implying that the call has to be re-established already, or indeed ever before will be. I m sorry is the whole allude of the sentence, after ~ all. It"s simply a reminder that it should be.
So I would certainly most definitely say, "Haven"t heard something from girlfriend in a while".
This might be just my dialect/idiolect, though. I haven"t checked any corpora.
enhance this answer
answered might 12 "13 in ~ 14:36
94.7k3737 gold badges303303 silver- badges395395 bronze badges
add a comment |
The sentence you give should be:
"Haven"t heard something from friend in a while." or "Haven"t heard anything from you for a while."
No difference in meaning in this case, in ~ least, no to my expertise in American rwcchristchurchappeal.com, and not in my idiolect. But there would certainly in these cases:
I"ll give this to you in a while.
boost this answer
edited may 12 "13 in ~ 14:42
answered may 12 "13 at 14:36
include a comment |
The difference between for Duration and also in Duration counts on whereby the recommendation Time is. Referral time is an instant in time, not a Duration; yet Duration is measured native it. In Duration describes a time period Duration long that ends in ~ the reference Time For Duration refers to a time duration Duration lengthy that begins in ~ the referral Time.
boost this answer
answered might 12 "13 in ~ 17:21
man LawlerJohn Lawler
96.8k99 yellow badges153153 silver- badges414414 bronze title
| present 4 much more comments
These phrases have similar meanings. They space not generally interchangeable, but there"s one exception.
for a while
This phrase indicates a limited, continuous time period. If friend go on vacation for a week, you will certainly be gone consistently until a week has actually passed and also then return.
not for a while
If you won"t return from holidays for a week, you will certainly be absent for a week and also then return. This intake implies a definite finish to the period, although the specific timing might be vague (a while).
haven"t for a while
If girlfriend haven"t seen him because that a week, climate he was missing for that duration. Since for shows a limited time, this frequently implies that the absence has ended (as RegDwighт suggests). However, as soon as talking around a addressed time leading approximately the present, it might simply keep in mind that the time period has actually ended, not the action.
in a while
This phrase shows a time some distance far – usually, but not always, in the future. If friend go on holidays in a week, you will certainly not leave until a week native now.
not in a while
If friend won"t return from vacation in a week, then you will still be gone a week native now, with no point out of as soon as you will certainly actually return. This usage generally indicates a deviation from plans or expectations: We can"t acquire the task done in a month.
haven"t in a while
If friend haven"t watched him in a week, then he disappeared a week before now. This intake indicates a time part distance in the past. There is no implication the the period has ended.
See more: The Ministry Of Maria Woodworth Etter 100 Year Prophecy, 100 Year Old Prophecy
For the example in the question, haven"t because that a while and haven"t in a while are around interchangeable. For tote a weak implication that the lack has ended; in walk not.