for or in? (For less than ten years, a third of Vietnam's population, or as many)

[Spdazero]

which of those are right, 'For less than ten years, a third of Vietnam's population, or as many as 20 million people, have been lifted out of poverty.' or 'In less than ten years, a third of Vietnam's population, or as many as 20 million people, have been lifted out of poverty.' can you explain?
thanks.

[Jamie (K)]

The correct choice would be "in".

If you used "for", the sentence would mean that the people had been lifted out of poverty temporarily, but that after those ten years, they may have fallen back into poverty.
Compare: "He was an accountant for 10 years." That means that after those 10 years were over, he wasn't an accountant anymore.

With "in", it means that over a period of ten years it was possible to lift 20 million people out of poverty, probably permanently.

[Gray]

Yes, the use of 'in' is appropriate here.
You could contrast the meaning of 'for' with that of 'in' by following this example which demonstrates the correct use of 'for':

"For more than ten years, the third of the Vietnam's population was living below poverty line."

There are a few more corrections:

1) the article 'the'
2) the removal of the comma ',' after '....20 million people'
3) and the phrase 'lifted above the poverty line'

"In less than ten years, the third of the Vietnam's population, or as many as 20 million people have been lifted above the poverty line."

PLEASE SEE BELOW FOR FURTHER CORRCTIONS

~Gray.
_________________
First lesson - English, not english. I, not i. ~A student of English

[Jamie (K)]

[Gray]

Thanks Jamie. Does it mean we should not use articles with proper names?

Can you please review the sentence again? Which use is correct - 'lifted out of poverty' or 'lifted above the poverty line'?

~Gray.
_________________
First lesson - English, not english. I, not i. ~A student of English

[Jamie (K)]

"Lifted out of poverty" means that the people are not poor anymore.

"Lifted above the poverty line" means that the people's standard of living has risen above a statistical line at which the government or economists somewhere have decided poverty begins.

Very few proper names have articles before them, and the vast majority of them don't.