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.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: It's a niggling thing...
Date: 2003-03-09 02:22 pm (UTC)I certainly understand peeves, but as one who did this just last night, I have to say: they sound entirely different to me. I would even argue they have different meanings.
Like I was saying, just last night in a fic (are you reading
So I put it back. *shrug* Languages are living things, not just dictionary-museum pieces.
(My random $.02, of course :)
You're not the culprit.
Date: 2003-03-09 02:27 pm (UTC)And this probably isn't me being rational; it's me in apres-fic sizzling-neuron mode. Which admittedly isn't a tenth as bad as apres-bar exam thermonuclear wasteland...
Re: You're not the culprit.
Date: 2003-03-09 02:36 pm (UTC)Just had a RL discussion with
She's the exact reverse.
*shrug*
And, as I pointed out to her (and she insisted I repeat here), I'm a Lapsed Grammatical Purist. Much like a lapsed Catholic, I know exactly how everything is supposed to be done, used to do it religiously, and used to insist everyone else must follow the rules as well. Then had a break, no longer obsessed over it, and began to make a habit of poking at anyone who does.
It's a thing. :)