"sacrément amoureuse pour dire" / "sacrément amoureuse, de dire" - what's the difference in meaning?

Question

Mais bon, faut être sacrément amoureuse pour dire ça candidement sans se rendre compte du message caché.

I think that normally a combination of some adverb like "sacrément/drôlement/bien/plutot" and the preposition "pour" is used when one wants to say "~ must be very/quite ~ to do ~". So I was surprised to see the preposition "de" is used in the following sentence, although the meaning of the sentence construct seems like similar, if not the same.

Ces loups étaient drôlement hardis, de venir s’attaquer à la caravane ! Ils devaient avoir vraiment très faim.

Is this the same as

Ces loups étaient drôlement hardis pour venir s’attaquer à la caravane ! Ils devaient avoir vraiment très faim.

And about the first one, can one say

Mais bon, faut être sacrément amoureuse, de dire ça candidement sans se rendre compte du message caché.

Answer 1

Both meanings are very close, and I'd say the main difference is the introducing verb : falloir or être. Il faut calls pour, while être does not. (thus your last examples do not work)

être does not call pour and conveys supposition and observation, with an logical inversion, because the observation is the source of the supposition. Supposition: the wolves were brave, observation, they attacked. The logically inversed sentence really means: I see them attack, so I think they are brave.

In the first sentence, on the other hand, no observation is needed. You can say Il faut... pour without actually seeing this happen. It conveys a needed state and the consequence of this state. State: to be in love, consequence: saying this.

Please note that in fact, your question is not related to the emphasizing adverbs sacrément, drôlement, etc. The sentences work without, and the same questions may stem.