piccolo is a time traveler, so his English actually comes from different time periods. As such, I wouldn't rely on his English degree to help with modern day English.

This here is just an inversion of "wanted for was".

All I really wanted for (dramatic pause) was him to love me.

All I really longed for (dramatic pause) was him to love me.

But we wouldn't say "longed was for," so be confused, because it is just an arbitrary grammatical thing.

Phrasing like "I want for nothing" (i.e., I am content) has gone out of style, but that perverse inversion remains.

Now encountered a phrase(rather recalled & used), "there is only so much I can do". I do very well understand what does it mean, I'm clueless how to translate it to Russian though. Now I'm unsure I can break it down grammatically, so I'm as clueless about the grammar of phrase the about my doings as I am about her love towards him.

Wonderful. So no logic. In other words, I should remember it as is without trying to understand it? I guess I did this with the "there is only so much..", so I can do this for his love towards her as well I guess, if this is all she ever wanted..

No. & Googling it sends me to Chinese stuff..
{"name":"610534","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/7\/3\/73536c98a1f0a796570fe1c6c24073dc.png","w":1680,"h":1010,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/7\/3\/73536c98a1f0a796570fe1c6c24073dc"}

Now the Egg literally scares me. I don't even know if I understood his sentence. Here's my understanding of the lambs & the sheep: Uhm. No. I'm clueless I totally understand every single words, but not all of'em together. I'll end up stopping eating eggs. They speak English I do not understand.

***

Alright. I think ML perhaps actually gets me to the understanding of it. We can want for something. I wonder if I can want for a new computer. Perhaps I can't, but probably I could in the times before Shakespeare. Well, if there were computers back then. Now it about love just decided this old phrasing outlives Shakespeare?

I am not convinced that omitting the "for" results in an unnaturally sounding sentence. Rather, it merely results in a different nuance. Either is fine.

This thread made me think of this song, though I guess it doesn't really help:

Append:

^ This. The original sentence/phrase would be fine without the help. It just changes the nuance. It reads a little bit more proper with the help, which means that native speakers are probably more likely not to use it in informal conversation and writing. It's optional.

Append:

An off-topic observation that might belong in another active thread could be made:

• A woman might say, "I want[ed] him to love me."

• A man might say, "I want [to be with] her."

In the former case, it's all about the woman. In the latter case, it's still all about the woman. Worth noting.

"There is only so much I can do." (original)
I can do only so much.
I can only do so much.

Edit the English langue is probably way AIs are not as advance to day as they should be. the poor AIs get confused and stuck in an infinite loop.