Re: Due To: the real story

Subject: Re: Due To: the real story
From: "Dave L. Meek's User Account" <dave -at- ROGUE -dot- DISC-SYNERGY -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 09:57:36 -0700

>Here's what Strunk and White have to say:

>"Due to. Loosely used for through, because of, or owing to in adverbial

>He lost the first game due to carelessness.
>He lost the first game because of carelessness.

>In correct use synonymous with attributable to: 'The accident was due to bad
> weather'; 'losses due to preventable fires.'"

Roy Copperud, in *American Usage and Style: the Consensus*,

"The [due to] distinction is hairsplitting, and cannot be defended
on grammatical grounds."

He then illustrates with the following sentence:

"Asian flu is due to a virus."

where "because of," "owing to," and "through" are clearly
impossible. In this instance, "due to" and "attributable" are
interchangeable and equally valid.

Dave Meek "Imagine Whirled Peas"

Previous by Author: In & Under & Taxes
Next by Author: Re: Due To: the real story
Previous by Thread: Re: Due To: the real story
Next by Thread: Re: Due To: the real story

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads