paint the town red + adverbial

MollyB   Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:20 pm GMT
Does it sound OK to say "let's paint the town red for a few hours".

And how about "they painted the town red in four hours"?
MollyB   Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:30 pm GMT
Another:

"I cried my eyes out for hours."

? "It took me hours to cry my eyes out."

"I cried my eyes out in hours."

Why does "for" work there, but not "in"? What is it about "in" that forces a literal reading, even if absurd?
guest   Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:34 pm GMT
<<"I cried my eyes out in hours."
Why does "for" work there, but not "in"? >>

I suppose because the logic is off...you don't specify how many hours.

Had you written: 'I cried my eyes out in three hours' that sounds fine. Otherwise, sounds like your tears came out in quantities of time [i.e. Hours:]
MollyB   Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:10 pm GMT
<Had you written: 'I cried my eyes out in three hours' that sounds fine. >

It sounds odd. It gives an absurd literal reading (one's eyes literally fell out at the end of three hours) to what is normally a metaphor.
Guest   Wed Oct 03, 2007 11:41 pm GMT
<<Why does "for" work there, but not "in"? What is it about "in" that forces a literal reading, even if absurd? >>

I think doing something "in XX hours" implies that the task was completed, whereas doing omething "for XX hours" just says that you did it foe that long. Example:

"I ran the marathon for 6 hours." (may have stopped before completion, having gotten enough execise or the day).

"I ran the marathon in 6 hours." (completed the whole distance)
paint   Wed Oct 03, 2007 11:54 pm GMT
MollyB, are you from CC?
Guest   Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:37 am GMT
<MollyB, are you from CC? >

CC?
M56   Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:39 am GMT
<I think doing something "in XX hours" implies that the task was completed, whereas doing omething "for XX hours" just says that you did it foe that long.>

Yes, the "for-adverb" expresses action and the "in-adverb" accomplishment.