Blind of/ Blind in

[Barman]

1) He is blind in one eye.

2) He is blind of one eye.

Between 'blind of' and 'blind in', which is more idiomatic?

 

[Tdol]

Where did you see blind of?

 

[Barman]

Where did you see blind of?

In a grammar book named 'A text-book of higher English grammar, composition & translation' by P.K. DE SARKAR.

 

[emsr2d2]

A quick Google search tells me that that book was published in 1926. You might want to update your reference library. A lot has changed in 96 years.

 

[Barman]

A quick Google search tells me that that book was published in 1926. You might want to update your reference library. A lot has changed in 96 years.

Thank you for your suggestion. You mean that the usage of the preposition 'of' after the word 'blind' is historical rather than current. Am I right?

 

[GoesStation]

Thank you for your suggestion. You mean that the usage of the preposition 'of' after the word 'blind' is historical rather than current. Am I right?

It's certainly not right today. I don't recall having seen that turn of phrase in old books, either. I suspect your book is simply incorrect both now and in the era in which it was written.

 

[Rover_KE]

You will also see/hear 'He has lost the sight of one eye' and 'He has lost his sight in one eye'.

 

[emsr2d2]

I'm not even familiar with it as archaic usage but if it's in a reputable book, then I can accept that it was used. I note, though, that the book was written by a Bangladeshi person teaching English to Bangladeshi people so perhaps it was used in that variant.

Edit: I hadn't seen GoesStation's post when I wrote this.

 

[tedmc]

To lose sight of something is common though.

 

[Rover_KE]

To lose sight of something is common though.

... but in contexts unrelated to blindness.

 

[Tdol]

In a grammar book named 'A text-book of higher English grammar, composition & translation' by P.K. DE SARKAR.

It may have been fine then, but we don't use it today, and haven't in the decades I have been alive.