Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times

analyst41@xxxxxxxxxxx skreiv:

On Aug 11, 5:42 pm, "benli...@xxxxxxxxxx" <benli...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 12, 8:05 am, analys...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Aug 11, 3:04 pm, Adam Funk <a24...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 2008-08-10, Brian M. Scott wrote:

On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 07:18:29 -0700 (PDT),
<analys...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<news:47020cff-57cc-4340-9bd7-2956455923af@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
in sci.lang:

start quote:
Overnight, Russia landed ground troops off of warships
into the disputed territory of Abkhazia and broadened its
bombing campaign to the Georgian capital’s airport.
end quote.
Whats next - "I'm like" for "I said" ?

Different category altogether. [...]

I agree with you. There are plenty of other "compound prepositions" in English: "He came down from the top of the hill while we were walking up to it." Of course, "off of" doesn't seem to add any information in comparison with "off", but I'm not convinced that's much of an objection to adding just one syllable or two letters.

There's a difference. In this case, for this non-native reader, it seems that the difference is in the ambiguity of 'off'. "Troops landed off-warships" get wet. "Troops landed-off of warships" don't.

Would you use it serious writing?

Somebody just did, as the example shows.

Why not? You still haven't explained why it's "dumb".

You are obviously posturing (have you ever used it in serious
writing?) It is just slovenly speech and inexcusable writing.

Why? It doesn't breech any rules of grammar. It's using a regular system for adding precision to a prepositional phrase.

[...]

http://cjrarchives.org/tools/lc/fused.asp
says
start quote:
(And while in technical land, we should note that "off of" is a
barbarism; drop the "of.")
end quote.

So you found some journalist who shares your prejudice and thinks
"barbarism" makes him sound learned.
You still haven't explained what's wrong with "off of".

I am sure you understand what 'drop the 'of'' means. And what makes the redundancy worse is the unintended rhyme.

Bad style? Bad poetry? But what has this got to do with language?

Here is what the online dictionary says

start quote:

Usage Note: The compound preposition off of is generally regarded as
informal and is best avoided in formal speech and writing: He stepped
off (not off of) the platform. Off is informal as well when used to
indicate a source: formal style requires I borrowed it from (not off)
my brother.

Nice research. That note tells two things of current language:
- There exists a compound preposition 'off of'.
- It's possible to use the preposition 'off' to indicate source.

Further conclusions are possible by implication. E.g., it would seem likely that the forms have substantial support in the actual spoken language for there to be a need for such a warning.

At any rate "off of" has a legitimate use
"In a war characterised by such atrocities as the hacking off of
civilians’ limbs and the widespread use of rape to"
That's not "off of" anyway, so it's not a "use" of anything.

Genuine "off of" is attested from the 15th century on.

Where?

King James Bible? Shakespeare? MIlton?

Actual language?

While "where are you at" is equally inapporpriate, somehow it is cute whereas "off of" is preternaturally annoying.

I'm sure you could regale us with a recital of your likes and dislikes all day long. Some might find this cute, and some annoying. But unless you can explain rationally what's wrong with "off of", take it to a.u.e.

This is sad also.

What? That this group cares for rules of language, not rules of conduct? But, actually, you'd probably be shot down in a.u.e. as well. While it's a group dedicated to English usage and also to discussions of style, most of its regular writers are fond of contemporary language and the colloquials. Or that's how I've seen it on my sporadic visits.

--
Trond Engen
- going off of the net in a few seconds
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: There Are a Number vs. There is a Number
    ... Robert Lieblich wrote: ... the verb should match the subject, not the object of the preposition. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: i want to speak good english
    ... Is the above quote a correct english sentence? ... A preposition, by definition, modifies what comes after ... I think the grammatically proper way to phrase that would be, ...
    (sci.lang.japan)
  • Re: Concerning an entry in the AUE FAQ
    ... the entry in the fast-access FAQ excerpt "Preposition at end" by Mark ... [end quote] ... Writing as a British English user, I find the "where...at" construction ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Concerning an entry in the AUE FAQ
    ... the entry in the fast-access FAQ excerpt "Preposition at end" by Mark ... [end quote] ...
    (alt.usage.english)
Loading