I always just think of them as “in effect” and “(for) example”, which is their direct expansion. But that distinction makes sense to me because I use the phrase

I always just think of them as “in effect” and “(for) example”, which is their direct expansion. But that distinction makes sense to me because I use the phrase “in effect” in speech as well sometimes. It hadn’t occurred to me that this is unusual - I suppose it is? I wonder if it’s a aus / US cultural difference? (I’m Australian) or maybe something I picked up years ago as a grad student?