[Grammar] cause of..." died of and died from"

[Mysterious tak]

Cause of " died of and died from"

 

[bhaisahab]

What is your question?

 

[emsr2d2]

Can you give us a complete sentence so that we can understand what you are trying to say?

 

[Tdol]

You can say cause of death, but not cause of died.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I would say that "died from" is more common than "died of'"

 

[Roman55]

I would have thought the opposite.

 

[MikeNewYork]

He died from massive trauma.
He died from a broken neck.
He died from massive blood loss.

I would find "of" less common in those cases.

 

[Raymott]

He died of heart disease.
He died of cancer.
He died of kidney failure.

I would find "from" less common in those cases.

 

[MikeNewYork]

For me, "from" is common in all those.

 

[jutfrank]

I don't think it matters which is more common because the prepositions of/from have subtly different meanings. (Consider the difference between 'made of/made from' for a clearer example.) We might generally say that of is more direct and from is more indirect. The preference of one over the other is shown in the following examples, I think, although admittedly very slightly.

• died of a heart attack
• died from his injuries

 

[jutfrank]

'Of seems the more commonly used preposition in most cases: Ngram

Be careful how you interpret Ngram data. Ngrams are not a guide to which words to favour.

of will be more common with certain uses whereas from will be more common in others. Their meanings are different.

 

[engee30]

To me personally, the two prepositions overlap in meaning. Die of is the short version of die because of; 'from' in the other indicates the source. There are, however, contexts where you would choose one over the other, as jutfrank points it out nicely.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I agree that "die of" is short for "die because of". That is why I prefer "die from".

 

[engee30]

Maybe this bit of print screen?

 

[jutfrank]

They both (die of/from) carry the meaning of 'as a result of' but they differ in how direct the causal relation is perceived to be. (That's how I'd put it, anyway.)

 

[curiousmarcus]

Perhaps: He died of snake bites, from hypovolemic shock?

 

[jutfrank]

He died from a snake bite, because it wasn't actually the bite that killed him -- it was what came from the bite (the shock) that killed him. So he died of hypovolemic shock.

 

[Raymott]

Perhaps: He died of snake bites, from hypovolemic shock?

Yes, or even, "He died of hypovolemic shock, from a snake bite."

Crossposted with above.
PS: I think we're approaching the limit of useful debate, though jutfrank's argument is convincing, and it's what I would instinctively say as a medico (and have said).

 

[Rover_KE]

I notice that the OP has neither thanked nor liked anything written above.

I expect their eyes glazed over long since.:-?

 

[engee30]

Agreed. I just didn't do my best to win the argument there.