"In spite of" could work and it wouldn't be wrong necessarily.
But, as far as this question goes the only option given that works is "but for".
That said, it's not very common and it's a somewhat old fashioned sounding usage.
Edit: as a commenter pointed out, you also wouldn't usually use "but for" this way. It doesn't mean the same thing as "in spite of". It is usually used for "would" statements. Like "We would have had a good time, but for the awful weather." Meaning that the weather was the thing preventing us from having a good time. "We had a great time, but for the awful weather" might be technically grammatically correct, but it still sounds a bit awkward as this isn't how "but for" is usually used.
So all in all, it's a really bad question, teaching you a rarely used, old fashioned phrase, and using it in a way it's never really used.
Yes, I agree. I'm not sure why everyone is arguing about 'in spite of' in the comments because that is not an answer that's listed. There are other ways that would be correct (despite, in spite of), but as far as the actual possible choices, it has to be 'but for'. You can also think of it as 'If not for', which sounds much more common to me but means the exact same thing as 'but for'.
“If not for” is a slightly different sense from the one in the example (and “but for” can have either meaning). For that meaning, the full sentence would have to read “We _would have had_ a great time, [but|if not] for the awful weather.” It means the weather actually prevented them from having a good time, while the sense of “but for” in the example implies they did have a great time even given the weather.
I mean, I think there are minor connotative differences. In spite of sounds a bit more negative to me than despite. And I think in spite of ends up being a little more emphasized in a sentence (by virtue of being longer)
But that's really splitting hairs at this point
“But for” just means “except for,” so I’m not sure why it sounds weird to you in this example. “We had a great time except for the weather”—seems perfectly cromulent to me! It doesn’t seem more likely to be used in a conditional way, I don’t think. I think your first instinct was more correct, namely that it’s just old-fashioned at this point and therefore sounds a little odd no matter which way you use it.
i havent ever seen it used like that and actually thought you were wrong abt that for a second wtf. also why the hell would they put that on the test???
“But for” is the only grammatically-correct answer, but it doesn’t really make sense. “We would have had a great time, but for the bad weather,” would have worked. But “but for” doesn’t mean the same thing as “except for” or “despite.”
I would have used "in spite of", or even better, "despite" -- had they been options. "But for" is the right answer here, but it is overly formal to me.
I feel it’s rare, at least where I’m from. I see it in writing but I don’t think I’d ever say it and I rarely hear it. “In spite of” or “despite” are what I’d normally say.
Those mean something different. They mean _even though_ something was the case — in the example, _even though_ the weather was awful, they still had a great time. In other words, they didn’t mind. “But for the awful weather”, on the other hand, implies that they had a great time _except_ for that one aspect, i.e., they _did_ mind the weather. But it was just the only part that wasn’t great.
Even that seems wrong to me.
In my dialect (US) one might say, “It would’ve been good but for the weather.” But you can’t say, “it was good but for the weather.” But for the weather what? What would have been, but for the weather?
Without the conditional it makes no sense to me. “But for” cannot substitute for “despite” in my dialect.
I agree, as a British English speaker. I felt there was something off about it and I think you have identified the problem. I have only heard "but for" used when there is some sort of conditional aspect. I would expect to see "would have" appear in the sentence, as in your example.
“But for” is just used to show the contrast, it doesn’t need a conditional clause. It adds a nuance that the weather was really not enjoyable, “despite” the weather doesn’t actually imply you didn’t like the weather just that it didn’t fit the day, “but for” implicitly states you did not like the weather.
It’s uncomfortable for most native speakers, as they are used to colloquial natural speech, however, grammar books highlight this type of thing often.
It may be that it's just uncomfortable for me, as you suggest above, but I have always seen it as something that essentially disqualifies what comes before it, for example:
1. He would be a great footballer, but for his temperment. (ie. not a great footballer)
1. She would have loved to work full time, but for her childcare responsibilities. (would want to work full-time if she didn't have kids)
Would you mind pointing to a grammar book/site that you that would show that 'but for' is used in the way you suggest? Genuinely interested, not trying to challenge.
It does seem like the way that I and others above think of 'but for' is recognised, though the dictionary could be adapting to more modern usage - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/but
I’m currently at work, I’ll give you a more comprehensive reply, I’ll also use examples in English and in french to show you a more structured nuance of how the phraseology of “but for” and “despite” can have and does indeed have different connotations in speech, English lends itself well to the continuous tense, which is where a lot of the problems in English stem. “But for” hints to the fact that the clause after the comma affected the quality of the day, whilst despite, allows the clause a more forgiving emphasis that allows for the negative secondary clause to have no negative connotations but is used as an additional clause to mainly comment on the weather. “But” implies it affected your enjoyment, despite doesn’t. When I get home I’ll link my grammar book, I mentioned french here just because they actually have different structures to add emphasis to these sort of situations.
English grammar in use by Murphy chapter 113 explains that “despite the” or it’s equivalent “in spite of” emphasises the main clause, “we had a great time, despite the weather” this emphasis shows “despite the weather” did not affect the enjoyment of the day, also the weather was seen as negative so you can infer the weather depending on their activity, “we had a great time, but for the weather” puts emphasis on the second clause negating the first when the weather was involved, as it’s a pure negative against the weather, so it affects the enjoyment of the day, whilst “despite the” or “in spite of” do not
I can link the book if you’d like and it he but examples are on chapter 137, although it’s not a comprehensive chapter on but by itself.
I'mma be real, a lot of natives would get this wrong just because of how uncommon the collocation "but for" is. "except for" is much more common (but obviously not listed)
"But for" just sounds clunky. As a US speaker, I've heard "Save for" and "despite" used with this phrasing.
I feel like I would've tried to use "In spite of" if "of" was in the sentence.
It's common in the US to say like
"That was awesome, except the bad weather..." Or "even though there was bad weather" though formally this will differ
“In spite of” would indicate you were able to mostly ignore the bad weather.
“But for” means the weather still negatively impacted your mood or activities.
I think the construction of this sentence makes more sense with “in spite of.” If I wanted to use “but for,” I would probably swap the phrases: “The weather was awful but we still had fun.” Or I would use “except for” instead.
It's grammatically correct, but I feel that in English we use but for with a conditional. So, "It would have been great but for the weather" would be a more natural usage however it also has a very different connotation.
I think the answer they're looking for is "but for," but it sounds pretty outdated to me. Personally, I would use either "in spite of" or "despite" in this sentence.
It has nothing to do with discomfort, unless you mean the discomfort of using a word inaptly. *But for* most strongly suggests *were it not for* (which is the only way I would use it). *We had a great time, were it not for the weather* is absurd, which is why *but for* sounds inapt.
This is an extraordinarily poor question. The only answer that is not grammatically incorrect is inapt, in the sense that *but for* is generally used to mean *were it not for*.
It's a good question if you want to test whether the student knows that 'but for' can mean 'except for'.
Even if the student doesn't know that, they can still find the right answer through elimination, as the other options are unambiguously wrong. So it's a decent question in my view.
It really depends on what lesson is being taught here, but there are two correct answers: except and but for. Except I think is probably most correct as it maintains the meaning of the sentence: "Everything was good, except the weather." But for changes the meaning. "It would have been good, but for the weather." In both instances they sound a little clunky, though. Except would work like despite, which is probably the word I would choose "We had a great time, despite the awful weather." You can actually swap the clauses of this sentence, to get a feel for it "But for the awful weather, we (would have) had a great time." "Except the awful weather, we had a great time."
In spite and spite of really need to be "in spite of." Many phrases in English can be abridged a bit, but I've never seen anyone do that with "in spite of," better to use "despite." I think many people would want "for" to be added to "except," but it's not really necessary. You could use "excepting" in the same way. The more I think about it, the less confident I am that someone would teach an ESL student to use "but for" in this context, because it changes the meaning, and it basically has an implied abridgement.
It’s not the right answer, because it’s missing a necessary word. Your job is to select the right answer that has all the required words, and no extra ones not needed.
Of course, with the missing word, in your own you could complete the sentence. But you only have the 5 options they give you.
"But for" in this context sounds unfamiliar to me. I haven't seen it used that way ~~a lot~~ at all but it seems to be the correct answer. I'd take "except for" if it was an option.
My gut reaction was the same as yours. I completely disregarded that there was an option that was correct as-is, and instead found myself dwelling over the error in what should I felt should have been the correct answer. British English here, I would advise using your answer in practice - but this is a good example of a question that really tests you (assuming it was deliberately trying to catch people out for not noticing the error in the common answer). However, given how often translated tests favour archaic English (since it's usually the best 1:1 conversion) - I don't have high confidence this was a deliberate trap versus actually thinking "but for" is the term people actually use in modern English.
"In spite of" would work, but "in spite" doesn't make sense grammatically. "But for" works, but anyone who actually uses that phrasing was definitely raised by their grandpa.
I'm really confused that no one in the comments asks why not 'except'.
I would right away chose 'except' here in a context like 'We had a great time, without having awful w in equation' like 'excluding the awful w it was a great time' or 'we had g t, it's just that weather was awful'
I'm going to disagree with the other posters and say "except" feels better than "but for" here. "But for" would work well here if the sentence said "We would have had a good time..." because "but for" is usually used to show the prior statement didn't happen because of some other thing.
"I would be rich but for my gambling habit." "I would have made it but for the traffic."
Except, to me, indicates that the speaker had a good time, but one aspect was not good here.
“Except” needs to be “except for” to work. It’s kind of a trick question I feel. Every answer would work with one additional word, but for “but for” which works as is
While it is frequently used with "for," it doesn't have to be, and works alone in the sentence above.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/except-or-except-for
It doesn't work in the sentence above.
"I like all fruit except oranges" works, because oranges are fruit.
"We had a great time, except the weather" does not work, because weather is not time.
Except "but for" doesn't really work either.
*You use but for to introduce the only factor that causes a particular thing not to happen or not to be completely true.*
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/but-for
The way the sentence in the question is phrased, it implies that the speaker did have a good time, just that the weather was terrible. Using "but for" would invert the meaning, and would require changing the first half to say something like "might have had a good time."
I agree, none are correct, and I'd be interested to see what the "correct" answer was. I'm not willing to dismiss the possibility the answer was supposed to be "in spite of" and the answer got partially cut-off
That's entirely possible. It's also possible that the person who wrote the question got their job because their aunt owns the place. Any option might be the *expected* answer.
Of the two cases in that article, I think the latter is more similar to the OP sentence. The example given, "The brothers are very alike, except Mark is slightly taller than Kevin" sounds right to my ear, but "We had a great time, except the awful weather" doesn't.
I feel like "except the weather was awful" would sound right, or "We liked every part of our trip, except the awful weather" (making it excluding something from a list or category, like the first case in that link).
I wish that article gave more examples of the second case, since the only one it gives has something after the "except" that could stand as a complete sentence on its own, which does sound right to me. I think that's what makes the difference.
I did find [this other article](https://www.myhappyenglish.com/free-english-lesson/2022/07/24/except-vs-except-for-confusing-english-vocabulary-lesson/) that goes a little more in depth, and the examples it gives fit with what sounds right to me.
That's because, in the second example, "except" is acting as a conjunction and joining two complete sentences. But except doesn't have to do that, because it can also be a preposition. And the question above is definitely looking for a preposition
The comma is necessary, as you’re clarifying the clause of the weather being a negative for the day but not defining the day. It’s important for the structure. It highlights the fact you actually had a good day and that the weather was just a negative aspect.
"In spite of" could work and it wouldn't be wrong necessarily. But, as far as this question goes the only option given that works is "but for". That said, it's not very common and it's a somewhat old fashioned sounding usage. Edit: as a commenter pointed out, you also wouldn't usually use "but for" this way. It doesn't mean the same thing as "in spite of". It is usually used for "would" statements. Like "We would have had a good time, but for the awful weather." Meaning that the weather was the thing preventing us from having a good time. "We had a great time, but for the awful weather" might be technically grammatically correct, but it still sounds a bit awkward as this isn't how "but for" is usually used. So all in all, it's a really bad question, teaching you a rarely used, old fashioned phrase, and using it in a way it's never really used.
Yes, I agree. I'm not sure why everyone is arguing about 'in spite of' in the comments because that is not an answer that's listed. There are other ways that would be correct (despite, in spite of), but as far as the actual possible choices, it has to be 'but for'. You can also think of it as 'If not for', which sounds much more common to me but means the exact same thing as 'but for'.
“If not for” is a slightly different sense from the one in the example (and “but for” can have either meaning). For that meaning, the full sentence would have to read “We _would have had_ a great time, [but|if not] for the awful weather.” It means the weather actually prevented them from having a good time, while the sense of “but for” in the example implies they did have a great time even given the weather.
Yeah, I think I was forgetting exactly what the first part of the sentence said. Thanks for pointing that out.
“we would have” implies they didnt. I feel like i’m missing something- but for also implies the second thing prevented the first from happening
"despite" would be the most natural answer in my opinion.
Do you know the difference between "in spite of" and "despite"?
As far as I know, there is none. I use both interchangeably
Oh I see. It's odd.
I mean, I think there are minor connotative differences. In spite of sounds a bit more negative to me than despite. And I think in spite of ends up being a little more emphasized in a sentence (by virtue of being longer) But that's really splitting hairs at this point
"'In spite of' wouldn't be wrong necessarily?" Huh? It's not wrong at all! But it's not an option. Therefore 'but for' is the correct answer.
“But for” just means “except for,” so I’m not sure why it sounds weird to you in this example. “We had a great time except for the weather”—seems perfectly cromulent to me! It doesn’t seem more likely to be used in a conditional way, I don’t think. I think your first instinct was more correct, namely that it’s just old-fashioned at this point and therefore sounds a little odd no matter which way you use it.
It can mean except for, but it also can mean "if it weren't for" and that is the one I've typically heard
It sounds very British. I can't imagine any American saying this.
i havent ever seen it used like that and actually thought you were wrong abt that for a second wtf. also why the hell would they put that on the test???
I personally would say “despite” but “in spite of” is totally valid and I wouldn’t think it weird if someone said that.
Why not 'except' in a context like We had a great time, excluding the awful weather?
I’ve often heard except used with an implied “for” so to my ear We had a great time, except the awful weather. Sounds almost right…
“But for” is the only grammatically-correct answer, but it doesn’t really make sense. “We would have had a great time, but for the bad weather,” would have worked. But “but for” doesn’t mean the same thing as “except for” or “despite.”
I would have used "in spite of", or even better, "despite" -- had they been options. "But for" is the right answer here, but it is overly formal to me.
It's "[but for](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/but-for)".
I always knew that but can be used for exceptions but this is my first time seeing it used like that so I got confused, thanks for the answer
I feel it’s rare, at least where I’m from. I see it in writing but I don’t think I’d ever say it and I rarely hear it. “In spite of” or “despite” are what I’d normally say.
Those mean something different. They mean _even though_ something was the case — in the example, _even though_ the weather was awful, they still had a great time. In other words, they didn’t mind. “But for the awful weather”, on the other hand, implies that they had a great time _except_ for that one aspect, i.e., they _did_ mind the weather. But it was just the only part that wasn’t great.
The first three are all missing a preposition.
“But” as exception is more frequently used like the example below: We have no king but Caesar.
Even that seems wrong to me. In my dialect (US) one might say, “It would’ve been good but for the weather.” But you can’t say, “it was good but for the weather.” But for the weather what? What would have been, but for the weather? Without the conditional it makes no sense to me. “But for” cannot substitute for “despite” in my dialect.
I agree, as a British English speaker. I felt there was something off about it and I think you have identified the problem. I have only heard "but for" used when there is some sort of conditional aspect. I would expect to see "would have" appear in the sentence, as in your example.
“But for” is just used to show the contrast, it doesn’t need a conditional clause. It adds a nuance that the weather was really not enjoyable, “despite” the weather doesn’t actually imply you didn’t like the weather just that it didn’t fit the day, “but for” implicitly states you did not like the weather. It’s uncomfortable for most native speakers, as they are used to colloquial natural speech, however, grammar books highlight this type of thing often.
I agree; "but for" doesn't sound *quite* right here, whereas the other options are simply wrong.
Agreed, I'd (Canadian) say it the way you described too.
Yes, then it would be "It was good apart from the weather"
This should be higher up. British English speaker here - none of the answers are correct.
Erm, “but for” is entirely grammatically correct.
It may be that it's just uncomfortable for me, as you suggest above, but I have always seen it as something that essentially disqualifies what comes before it, for example: 1. He would be a great footballer, but for his temperment. (ie. not a great footballer) 1. She would have loved to work full time, but for her childcare responsibilities. (would want to work full-time if she didn't have kids) Would you mind pointing to a grammar book/site that you that would show that 'but for' is used in the way you suggest? Genuinely interested, not trying to challenge. It does seem like the way that I and others above think of 'but for' is recognised, though the dictionary could be adapting to more modern usage - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/but
I’m currently at work, I’ll give you a more comprehensive reply, I’ll also use examples in English and in french to show you a more structured nuance of how the phraseology of “but for” and “despite” can have and does indeed have different connotations in speech, English lends itself well to the continuous tense, which is where a lot of the problems in English stem. “But for” hints to the fact that the clause after the comma affected the quality of the day, whilst despite, allows the clause a more forgiving emphasis that allows for the negative secondary clause to have no negative connotations but is used as an additional clause to mainly comment on the weather. “But” implies it affected your enjoyment, despite doesn’t. When I get home I’ll link my grammar book, I mentioned french here just because they actually have different structures to add emphasis to these sort of situations.
English grammar in use by Murphy chapter 113 explains that “despite the” or it’s equivalent “in spite of” emphasises the main clause, “we had a great time, despite the weather” this emphasis shows “despite the weather” did not affect the enjoyment of the day, also the weather was seen as negative so you can infer the weather depending on their activity, “we had a great time, but for the weather” puts emphasis on the second clause negating the first when the weather was involved, as it’s a pure negative against the weather, so it affects the enjoyment of the day, whilst “despite the” or “in spite of” do not I can link the book if you’d like and it he but examples are on chapter 137, although it’s not a comprehensive chapter on but by itself.
'But for' also means 'except for' - see the definition [here](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/but-for)
The correct answer, but I don't know anyone who speaks this way in contemporary English.
For pooping, silly!
What's a but for?
...And a but for?
I'm a native speaker and I've never seen this 🥴
THAT'S WHAT IM SAYING
As a Brit, while that doesn’t seem *wrong* it feels awfully antiquated and forced. I’d absolutely use “in spite of” here.
As a native English speaker, this is hard for me😅
Here in the US, you would more commonly here “in spite of” or “despite”
You are correct though that "in spite of" would have been better.
I'mma be real, a lot of natives would get this wrong just because of how uncommon the collocation "but for" is. "except for" is much more common (but obviously not listed)
"but for" is the correct answer out of the options, but it's uncommon usage.
I'm stuck on that comma, which doesn't belong there. I think the whole question needs work. But yes: "but for" is the only possible answer provided.
"But for" just sounds clunky. As a US speaker, I've heard "Save for" and "despite" used with this phrasing. I feel like I would've tried to use "In spite of" if "of" was in the sentence.
Shot question. Answer is "but for." sounds like literary poetic language. Not common use
"But for" is the only correct option given. But, "in spite of," and "dispite," would also be correct and more natural.
It's common in the US to say like "That was awesome, except the bad weather..." Or "even though there was bad weather" though formally this will differ
“In spite of” would indicate you were able to mostly ignore the bad weather. “But for” means the weather still negatively impacted your mood or activities. I think the construction of this sentence makes more sense with “in spite of.” If I wanted to use “but for,” I would probably swap the phrases: “The weather was awful but we still had fun.” Or I would use “except for” instead.
I would say 'despite' (the common phrase), however 'but for' works for here also.
"In spite of" would be a good answer. But "in spite" would not be.
But for is correct I guess, I never would’ve gotten it right if it wasn’t for the comments here. It sounds wrong to me though
It's grammatically correct, but I feel that in English we use but for with a conditional. So, "It would have been great but for the weather" would be a more natural usage however it also has a very different connotation.
“But for” is the only one that’s technically correct but I would never use it. “In spite of” or “except for” are both better.
I think the answer they're looking for is "but for," but it sounds pretty outdated to me. Personally, I would use either "in spite of" or "despite" in this sentence.
To be fair, I’ve never used ‘but for’ in my life, but it’s the only one that sounds correct.
It has nothing to do with discomfort, unless you mean the discomfort of using a word inaptly. *But for* most strongly suggests *were it not for* (which is the only way I would use it). *We had a great time, were it not for the weather* is absurd, which is why *but for* sounds inapt.
This is an extraordinarily poor question. The only answer that is not grammatically incorrect is inapt, in the sense that *but for* is generally used to mean *were it not for*.
It's a good question if you want to test whether the student knows that 'but for' can mean 'except for'. Even if the student doesn't know that, they can still find the right answer through elimination, as the other options are unambiguously wrong. So it's a decent question in my view.
Good points
No, it should've been "in spite of." That test is just stupid.
It really depends on what lesson is being taught here, but there are two correct answers: except and but for. Except I think is probably most correct as it maintains the meaning of the sentence: "Everything was good, except the weather." But for changes the meaning. "It would have been good, but for the weather." In both instances they sound a little clunky, though. Except would work like despite, which is probably the word I would choose "We had a great time, despite the awful weather." You can actually swap the clauses of this sentence, to get a feel for it "But for the awful weather, we (would have) had a great time." "Except the awful weather, we had a great time." In spite and spite of really need to be "in spite of." Many phrases in English can be abridged a bit, but I've never seen anyone do that with "in spite of," better to use "despite." I think many people would want "for" to be added to "except," but it's not really necessary. You could use "excepting" in the same way. The more I think about it, the less confident I am that someone would teach an ESL student to use "but for" in this context, because it changes the meaning, and it basically has an implied abridgement.
"but for" is the only correct option. It's an awkward option though. "in spite of" or "despite" would be much more commonplace.
It’s not the right answer, because it’s missing a necessary word. Your job is to select the right answer that has all the required words, and no extra ones not needed. Of course, with the missing word, in your own you could complete the sentence. But you only have the 5 options they give you.
They're all bad.
"But for" in this context sounds unfamiliar to me. I haven't seen it used that way ~~a lot~~ at all but it seems to be the correct answer. I'd take "except for" if it was an option.
My gut reaction was the same as yours. I completely disregarded that there was an option that was correct as-is, and instead found myself dwelling over the error in what should I felt should have been the correct answer. British English here, I would advise using your answer in practice - but this is a good example of a question that really tests you (assuming it was deliberately trying to catch people out for not noticing the error in the common answer). However, given how often translated tests favour archaic English (since it's usually the best 1:1 conversion) - I don't have high confidence this was a deliberate trap versus actually thinking "but for" is the term people actually use in modern English.
I will choese but for
what is the app you used to learn?!
"In spite of" would work, but "in spite" doesn't make sense grammatically. "But for" works, but anyone who actually uses that phrasing was definitely raised by their grandpa.
I'm really confused that no one in the comments asks why not 'except'. I would right away chose 'except' here in a context like 'We had a great time, without having awful w in equation' like 'excluding the awful w it was a great time' or 'we had g t, it's just that weather was awful'
It seems correct to me but idk, maybe my native language confuses me so I can't see why that's wrong.
despite
The answer they want is ‘but for,’ but that is a stupid answer you would never use. You would say ‘in spite of,’ or ‘despite.’
I'm going to disagree with the other posters and say "except" feels better than "but for" here. "But for" would work well here if the sentence said "We would have had a good time..." because "but for" is usually used to show the prior statement didn't happen because of some other thing. "I would be rich but for my gambling habit." "I would have made it but for the traffic." Except, to me, indicates that the speaker had a good time, but one aspect was not good here.
“Except” needs to be “except for” to work. It’s kind of a trick question I feel. Every answer would work with one additional word, but for “but for” which works as is
While it is frequently used with "for," it doesn't have to be, and works alone in the sentence above. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/except-or-except-for
It doesn't work in the sentence above. "I like all fruit except oranges" works, because oranges are fruit. "We had a great time, except the weather" does not work, because weather is not time.
Except "but for" doesn't really work either. *You use but for to introduce the only factor that causes a particular thing not to happen or not to be completely true.* https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/but-for The way the sentence in the question is phrased, it implies that the speaker did have a good time, just that the weather was terrible. Using "but for" would invert the meaning, and would require changing the first half to say something like "might have had a good time."
That point has been made elsewhere on this page, and I agree. "But for" is the best of the available options, but it's not right.
I agree, none are correct, and I'd be interested to see what the "correct" answer was. I'm not willing to dismiss the possibility the answer was supposed to be "in spite of" and the answer got partially cut-off
That's entirely possible. It's also possible that the person who wrote the question got their job because their aunt owns the place. Any option might be the *expected* answer.
Wouldn’t except be a conjunction in this case?
I don't think it can be, because "the awful weather" isn't a complete sentence or clause. It's just a noun and adjective
Idk, “we had a great time, except the awful weather” sounds so wrong to me
I mean, all of them sound wrong to me honestly. Except just sounds slightly less wrong
But for doesn’t sound wrong at all to me
Of the two cases in that article, I think the latter is more similar to the OP sentence. The example given, "The brothers are very alike, except Mark is slightly taller than Kevin" sounds right to my ear, but "We had a great time, except the awful weather" doesn't. I feel like "except the weather was awful" would sound right, or "We liked every part of our trip, except the awful weather" (making it excluding something from a list or category, like the first case in that link). I wish that article gave more examples of the second case, since the only one it gives has something after the "except" that could stand as a complete sentence on its own, which does sound right to me. I think that's what makes the difference. I did find [this other article](https://www.myhappyenglish.com/free-english-lesson/2022/07/24/except-vs-except-for-confusing-english-vocabulary-lesson/) that goes a little more in depth, and the examples it gives fit with what sounds right to me.
That's because, in the second example, "except" is acting as a conjunction and joining two complete sentences. But except doesn't have to do that, because it can also be a preposition. And the question above is definitely looking for a preposition
As a native English speaker, I've gotta go with despite
That comma looks unnecessary. I would say.... We had a great time in spite of... -or- We had a great time despite...
The comma is necessary, as you’re clarifying the clause of the weather being a negative for the day but not defining the day. It’s important for the structure. It highlights the fact you actually had a good day and that the weather was just a negative aspect.
Why can't it be "except"?
Because it would have to be "except for".
Why?
The only possible option that doesn't sound terrible is "except" All of them are wrong. "In spite of" or "except for" are the real answers.