You've probably been there. You're staring at a blinking cursor, trying to sound authoritative in an email or an essay, and you reach for a "power word." You settle on "advocating." It sounds smart. It sounds professional. But then you realize you aren't actually sure if you should put "for" after it or just dive straight into the noun.
Honestly, it's a mess.
English is a strange beast, and the way we use advocating in a sentence has shifted over time, leading to a lot of "hypercorrection"—that's when people try so hard to be right that they actually end up being wrong. Most people think they know how to use it. Most people are actually just guessing based on what they heard in a corporate meeting once.
The Grammar War: To "For" or Not to "For"
Here is the crux of the problem. If you look at the strict, traditional rules of grammar, "advocate" is a transitive verb. That means it takes a direct object. You advocate something. You don't advocate for something.
Wait. Does that sound wrong to you?
It probably does. If you say, "I am advocating a new policy," it might feel like a word is missing. Our ears have become tuned to the "advocating for" construction. Even though traditionalists like those at the Oxford English Dictionary or the Chicago Manual of Style have historically leaned toward the direct object, the usage of "advocating for" has exploded in the last fifty years.
It's everywhere.
Grammarians call this a phrasal verb evolution. You see, the word "advocate" can also be a noun (an advocate). When we use the noun form, we almost always use "for." For example: "She is an advocate for children's rights." Because the noun requires "for," the verb form started stealing it. Language is messy like that. It’s a game of linguistic osmosis where rules bleed into each other until the "incorrect" version becomes the standard.
Real Examples of Using Advocating in a Sentence
Let's look at how this actually plays out in the real world. You can't just throw the word into a sentence and hope it sticks. Context is everything.
If you're writing a legal brief, you'll likely see: "The defense is advocating a lighter sentence." Notice there is no "for" there. It’s direct. It’s punchy. It’s precise.
On the other hand, if you're reading a blog post about social justice or community organizing, you’ll almost certainly see: "The group is advocating for better housing conditions."
Is one better?
Kinda. In a formal, academic, or high-level professional setting, dropping the "for" often makes you look like you have a better grasp of traditional syntax. In common speech, keeping the "for" makes you sound more human and less like a textbook.
Consider these variations:
- The Policy Approach: "The CEO spent the entire meeting advocating a shift toward renewable energy sources."
- The Personal Approach: "I've been advocating for you behind the scenes so you can get that promotion."
- The Gerund Phase: "Advocating change is never easy, especially in a stagnant organization."
Why This Word Causes So Much Stress
Basically, the stress comes from the "prepositional pull." We are used to verbs like "wait" or "look." You don't "wait a bus," you "wait for a bus." You don't "look a target," you "look at a target." Because "advocate" feels like an action directed toward a goal, our brains desperately want to insert a preposition to bridge the gap between the verb and the goal.
But "advocate" is more like "support." You don't "support for a candidate." You just "support a candidate."
✨ Don't miss: The Best Spicy Chicken Noodle Soup Recipe for When You’re Tired of the Bland Stuff
If you swap "advocating" with "supporting" and the sentence still makes sense, you probably don't need the "for." If you say "I am supporting for a new park," it sounds ridiculous. That is the quickest litmus test you’ve got.
Using Advocating in a Sentence for Professional Impact
Words have weight.
In business, "advocating" is a high-status word. It suggests leadership. It suggests that you aren't just following orders, but that you are actively trying to influence the direction of the company.
However, you've got to be careful not to overstay your welcome with it. If you use it three times in one paragraph, you start to sound like a middle manager who just discovered a thesaurus. Use it once. Use it well.
Think about the difference between these two sentences:
- "I think we should do this."
- "I am advocating this specific strategy because the data supports it."
The second one has teeth. It shows you're willing to put your reputation on the line for an idea. That’s the power of the word. It carries a sense of public endorsement. It’s not a private whim; it’s a public stance.
The Nuance of "Advocating" vs. "Suggesting"
A lot of people use these interchangeably. They shouldn't.
Suggesting is weak. It’s a trial balloon. You suggest something to see if anyone hates it. If they do, you can back away easily.
Advocating is a commitment.
💡 You might also like: Pictures of Chicken Hawks: Why What You’re Seeing Isn't What You Think
When you are advocating in a sentence, you are saying, "I have evaluated the options, and I believe this is the best path forward." There is a subtle legalistic undertone to the word—think of an "advocate" in the Scottish legal system, which is essentially a barrister or lawyer. You are acting as the legal counsel for an idea. You are its champion.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Don't use it for small stuff.
You don't "advocate" for a ham sandwich for lunch. Well, you could, but you’d look like a weirdo. It’s a heavy-duty word. Reserve it for principles, policies, people, or significant changes.
Another mistake? Redundancy.
"I am publicly advocating for..."
The word "advocating" already implies a level of public support. Adding "publicly" is like saying you're "currently sitting down right now." We get it.
Also, watch out for the passive voice.
"The change was advocated by the board."
Gross. It’s clunky. It’s vague.
"The board advocated the change."
Much better. Short. Direct.
Actionable Insights for Your Writing
If you want to master this word and actually improve your writing today, stop overthinking the "for" debate and start focusing on the object of your advocacy.
- Check your formality level. If you are writing for a professor or a prestigious law journal, try removing "for." If you're writing a letter to a friend or a LinkedIn post, keep the "for" if it feels more natural to your voice.
- Use the "Support" Test. Every time you write "advocating," mentally replace it with "supporting." If "supporting for" sounds wrong, then "advocating for" might be unnecessary in that specific context.
- Focus on the "Why." Advocating is an empty gesture without a reason. A strong sentence using this word always follows up with a "because" or a "to."
- Vary your verbs. If you've used "advocating" once, switch to "championing," "promoting," "endorsing," or "backing" for the rest of the piece.
Language isn't a static set of laws handed down from a mountain. It’s a living, breathing consensus. Right now, the consensus is split. By understanding that split, you can choose the version that fits your specific audience. That is what real expertise looks like—not just knowing a rule, but knowing when the rule matters and when it’s just noise.
When you use advocating in a sentence, you're doing more than just picking a verb. You're signaling your intent. You're showing that you have a stake in the outcome. Use that power wisely, and don't let the prepositions trip you up.
🔗 Read more: Exfoliating Sponge for Face: Why Most People Are Doing It Completely Wrong
Next time you write it, look at the word. Is it doing work for you? Or are you just using it to fill space? If it's doing work, keep it. If it's just fluff, cut it. Your readers will thank you for the clarity.
Keep your sentences lean. Keep your arguments sharp. That’s how you actually get people to listen to what you’re advocating.