good-by

[Abstract Idea]

I used to think that only the form "goodbye" was correct.

Was the form "good-by" ever preferred to "goodbye"?
Is "good-by", instead of "goodbye" also correct?

I am currently reading an old book (The Catcher in the Rye) with lots of "good-by" instead of "goodbye".

Checking some online dictionaries I see that the three forms "goodbye", "good-bye" and "good-by" exist. Are they all used?

By the way I've just found out that "goodbye" etymologically as an alteration from "God be with you" - interesting.

PS Feel free to correct any mistakes in my posts

 

[Leandro-Z]

"Good-bye" in a very British English-English dictionary doesn`t exist. Perhaps it is American and extremely informal. I mean, there may have been transformations in the Original Language that are called "popular jargon" and which are the worst use of English.
I would advise you to use "goodbye" to be more confident while writing or speaking English.

 

[sarat_106]

I used to think that only the form "goodbye" was correct.

Was the form "good-by" ever preferred to "goodbye"?
Is "good-by", instead of "goodbye" also correct?

I am currently reading an old book (The Catcher in the Rye) with lots of "good-by" instead of "goodbye".

Checking some online dictionaries I see that the three forms "goodbye", "good-bye" and "good-by" exist. Are they all used?

By the way I've just found out that "goodbye" etymologically as an alteration from "God be with you" - interesting.

PS Feel free to correct any mistakes in my posts

In India the expression is written as goodbye or good-bye, though some write it as good-by but rarely goodby. It is actually derived from the phrase "God be with you."

 

[Raymott]

I used to think that only the form "goodbye" was correct.

Was the form "good-by" ever preferred to "goodbye"?
Is "good-by", instead of "goodbye" also correct?

I am currently reading an old book (The Catcher in the Rye) with lots of "good-by" instead of "goodbye".

Checking some online dictionaries I see that the three forms "goodbye", "good-bye" and "good-by" exist. Are they all used?

By the way I've just found out that "goodbye" etymologically as an alteration from "God be with you" - interesting.

PS Feel free to correct any mistakes in my posts

Novelists do strange things.
If you get around to reading Ken Kesey's "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest", you'll see that he invariably writes "could of" for "could have".
Maybe some people write "good-by", but why not use a form you know will be considered correct by everyone?

 

[Abstract Idea]

Novelists do strange things.
If you get around to reading Ken Kesey's "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest", you'll see that he invariably writes "could of" for "could have".
Maybe some people write "good-by", but why not use a form you know will be considered correct by everyone?

Yes, I know the do. Maybe if they happen to do a "strange thing" which catches on
they could claim paternity.

But in this case, since it is an old book (1951), I am wondering whether "good-by" was common in the forties and fifties.

 

[Abstract Idea]

Novelists do strange things.
If you get around to reading Ken Kesey's "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest", you'll see that he invariably writes "could of" for "could have".

I didn't know this novel.
By the way I just checked it out and besides being also an old classic one (1962), it seems to deal with a somewhat similar thematic.

Thanks for mentioning it.

 

[Abstract Idea]

Thanks Gillnetter!

With these recommendations from two important UsingEnglish members, for whom I have enourmous respect, I´ll really look forward to reading it.

By the way I guess you explained Raymott´s remark. If the author himself uses and abuses of novelties, disrespecting standard usage rules, that´s one thing. But, on the other hand, if he or she puts it on the character´s speechs, that´s another thing.

In the case of The Catcher in the Rye the book was written from the protagonist´s point of view, in first person. If the author writes some weird stuff (and he really does, believe me), he can always blame the protagonist for saying it.

 

[Raymott]

Thanks Gillnetter!

With these recommendations from two important UsingEnglish members, for whom I have enourmous respect, I´ll really look forward to reading it.

By the way I guess you explained Raymott´s remark. If the author himself uses and abuses of novelties, disrespecting standard usage rules, that´s one thing. But, on the other hand, if he or she puts it on the character´s speechs, that´s another thing.

In the case of The Catcher in the Rye the book was written from the protagonist´s point of view, in first person. If the author writes some weird stuff (and he really does, believe me), he can always blame the protagonist for saying it.

There was a lot of similar writing around the 1950s. It was the "beat generation", a protest movement following WWII, when many young writers, poets and other artists - beatniks - produced "anti-establishment" works. If you're interested, you might try something by Hunter S Thompson. His semi-autobiographical work on the Hells Angels is interesting. Also Jack Kerouac's "On the Road".

All of these books are written in the first person. However, the argument from characterisation doesn't ring true. The Indian Chief narrates "Cuckoo's Nest", but "could of" is the only deviation from proper English that he uses, and it seems to turn up even in the dialogue of others. My guess would be that it's a quirk of Kesey. It's quite in the spirit of this type of writing for an author to say to a publisher, "It's 'could of' or nothing!" - just another scream of protest at the establishment.

A book from 1951 is certainly not old. Classic 1950s maybe.

 

[Raymott]

PS:
If you want to dig the beat check this cynical dame:
YouTube - I Feel Like Saying A Beatnik Poem 1950's B Movie Style

And for a 'square' establishment view:
YouTube - Something Weird The Beatniks

Crazy kids!