Niggling pet peeve.
Mar. 9th, 2003 04:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bktheirregularTaking a break, reading a fic, and one of my hot-button grammatical raw nerves got stepped on.
"All right" is two words. I can't think of a single instance where "alright" works and "all right" doesn't. Is "alright" even a proper word? Anywhere?
Close entry.
Whoops. Reopen entry.
Gakked (is that the word?) from dictionary.com's entry of "all right":
Usage Note: Despite the appearance of the form alright in works of such well-known writers as Langston Hughes and James Joyce, the single word spelling has never been accepted as standard. This is peculiar, since similar fusions such as already and altogether have never raised any objections. The difference may lie in the fact that already and altogether became single words back in the Middle Ages, whereas alright has only been around for a little more than a century and was called out by language critics as a misspelling. Consequently, one who uses alright, especially in formal writing, runs the risk that readers may view it as an error or as the willful breaking of convention.
"All right" is two words. I can't think of a single instance where "alright" works and "all right" doesn't. Is "alright" even a proper word? Anywhere?
Close entry.
Whoops. Reopen entry.
Gakked (is that the word?) from dictionary.com's entry of "all right":
Usage Note: Despite the appearance of the form alright in works of such well-known writers as Langston Hughes and James Joyce, the single word spelling has never been accepted as standard. This is peculiar, since similar fusions such as already and altogether have never raised any objections. The difference may lie in the fact that already and altogether became single words back in the Middle Ages, whereas alright has only been around for a little more than a century and was called out by language critics as a misspelling. Consequently, one who uses alright, especially in formal writing, runs the risk that readers may view it as an error or as the willful breaking of convention.
