Due to

[riquecohen]

I learned, many years ago, that we use due to only when it is preceded by a linking verb and, in the absence of a linking verb, because of is the preferred phrase. Thus, we would not say that "he faled to act due to his laziness," but rather 'his failure to act was due to...." or "he failed to act because of...." Is this still considered correct? Are there any up-to-date opinions on this matter?

 

[TheParser]

I learned, many years ago, that we use due to only when it is preceded by a linking verb and, in the absence of a linking verb, because of is the preferred phrase. Thus, we would not say that "he faled to act due to his laziness," but rather 'his failure to act was due to...." or "he failed to act because of...." Is this still considered correct? Are there any up-to-date opinions on this matter?

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


riquecohen,

One of my favorite questions.

(1) Yes, I also learned that "due" is an adjective, and

"because of" is a preposition.

The boss: Why are you late?

The employee: I arrived late due to trafffic problems.

I arrived late because of traffic problems.

My lateness is due (to traffic problems).

According to the rules, only the second and third sentences are

considered "correct."

But, of course, few people would express themselves using the

third sentence.

(2) I think that you are correct: "due to" is now accepted as a

preposition along with "because of." I have no proof to offer, but

I can report the following:

At the best (in my opinion) adult ESL school in the United States,

the final examination in advanced classes accepts "due to" as a

preposition in sentences such as: I arrived late due to traffic

problems.

I think a few people are trying to keep "due to" an adjective, but they

have lost the battle, along with the few people who insist on saying

"It is I."


***** NOT a teacher *****


P. S. And I suspect the people who insist on "This secret is between

you and me" will lose to the growing numbers who say " ... between

you and I."

As you know, language is truly democratic. The majority rules.

 

[Allen165]

NOT A TEACHER.

I also think it's nowadays acceptable to say "due to" when one means "because of," at least as regards North America.

I personally like using "due to" in this sense because it's a shorter way of saying "because of."

 

[Allen165]

Parser, do you happen to know Bryan Garner's stance on this subject?

Thanks.

 

[TheParser]

Parser, do you happen to know Bryan Garner's stance on this subject?

Thanks.

No, I don't. I shall check his book. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Barb_D]

I'm in that category of well-educated people who rarely remembers that there is supposed to be (or once was) a difference between these phrases. I don't use "due to" often because it sounds contrived a lot of the time.

 

[5jj]

I'm in that category of well-educated people who rarely remembers that there is supposed to be (or once was) a difference between these phrases. I don't use "due to" often because it sounds contrived a lot of the time.

Me too. Or should that be I too?