An Argument for the Use of Due
Due to a lack of attention or understanding of English grammar, many Americans have, for several generations, used the adjective due as part of a prepositional phrase to introduce adverbial elements- to the disapproval of some strict grammarians. Although I prefer their prescription, for reasons of style, I must oppose their claim to correctness, on the pragmatic grounds of logic and sensibility.
The most shakily grounded argument against the adverbial use is one of etiquette or style. Wilson Follett considers this use as "poor workmanship" which is "loose and lawless....rare in writers other than those who take advantage of every latitude." (Follett). H. W. Fowler also reveals a negative bias in his statement that "due to is often used by illiterates" ( Qtd. in Morris). But, as Bergen Evans said, "it is used to qualify a verb millions of times every day. And it is used in this way in very respectable places." So, if we are to devise and enforce laws of grammar based on usage by a particular social class or the preference of some who disapprove of its workmanship-who I might add are a minority-then we should sharpen our pencils, and prepare our oratories, for the battle we've begun hardly ends with this issue and is certain to be long and arduous.
A second argument, best stated by Follett, that not every locution is right by virtue of its existence, appears to highlight the noble defense of language from the deterioration caused by uneducated and uncouth use. If this were the case here, I would heartily applaud Follett and Fowler for their defense. But it is not the case. For example, engraved tablets adorning the Philadelphia state house read, " Here sat the Continental Congress...except when...it sat in Baltimore, and in...Lancaster and in...York, due to the temporary occupation of Philadelphia by the British army." (Qtd. In Evans). And in 1957 Queen Elizabeth II opened her addressed of the Canadian parliment with, "Due to inability to market their grain, prairie farmers have been faced for some time with a shortage of sums..." (qtd. In Morris). The wide spread, public and formal use of due to for adverbial elements hardly qualifies it as uneducated or uncouth and actually contradicts the definition of locution. In fact, if precise usage is the issue, I think it would be more accurate to call the grammarians substitution of other phrases in adverbial uses a locution.
James J. Rawls perspective of the California Dream consists of promise and paradox. People from all over move to California in hopes of finding opportunity and success. However California cannot fulfill people’s expectations.
1 Wilson Follett, in the article “On Usage, Purism, Pedantry” from Modern American Usage, promotes how two parties view the rights and wrongs concerning the usage of language.
"Daniel Orozco-Department of English-University of Idaho." Daniel Orozco-Department of English-University of Idaho. N.p., n.d. Web. . .
A sacrifice is a strong action in which one is willing to put a priority before oneself. “Proofs” is an essay written by Richard Rodriguez about a Mexican adolescent teen who narrates the harsh reality of his family members going through immigration. The essay focuses on the differences between the American lifestyle versus immigrant lifestyle. “The Apology: Letters from a Terrorist” is an essay written by Laura Blumenfeld. It’s about how her father was shot by a terrorist. Thirteen years later, she decided to visit the gunman’s country to get an apology to her father, to find out how he feels about the situation, and what happened in his perspective. In both pieces of writing, family is a strong theme that is shown in multiple ways.
The Consequence Argument is an argument that concludes a hypothesis to be true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences. This is based on an appeal to emotion, or a manipulation of one’s emotion in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. There are two sides in the Consequence Argument, compatibilism and determinism. Free will is the ability to either perform or restrain from actions based upon one’s decision. In the free will debate, Peter van Inwagen, a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, takes on a compatibilist view by establishing that freedom can be present or absent in situations for any reasons, and that if determinism is true than one’s
Simpson, J. A., and E. S. C. Weiner. The Oxford English dictionary. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1989.Print.
In “Do You Speak American?” by Robert MacNeil, MacNeil uses outside sources, personal anecdotes, and familiar diction in attempts to prove that the transformation of American English is a positive outcome and should be accepted.
Consequence argument means taking a radical claim between compatibilism and determinism. Compatibilism is the free will to do whatever one wishes to do because it is in their own nature. In the free will debate of “Consequence Argument,” Peter van Inwagen, the author of An Essay on Free Will, takes on a compatibilist view by arguing that determinism is not true because one cannot be held responsible for their own actions. Determinism is the belief that human actions or free will have either a positive or an effect in the future. John Martin Fischer, professor of philosophy at the University of California, takes on a determinist view by arguing that compatibilism is never true because one must be held responsible for their own actions. Between both views on compatibilism and determinism, I will explain how the Consequence Argument can be challenged.
McMillan, Norman. Flannery O’Connor Bulletin: Department of English and Speech. Milledgeville, GA: Georgia College, 1987.
Kristof is sarcastically and quietly confident in his belief that America is the second most armed country in the World, with the first being terrorism-plagued Yemen in the midst of a “minor civil war”. In this anti-weaponry advisory, readers are informed of gun fatality statistics, the self-imposed dangers of owning a firearm and stand witness to Kristof’s somewhat comical discrediting of many exaggerated pro-gun claims. He recruits academic authority, Harvard professor and author David Hemenway, regarding his perspective of the prevalence and effects of the soaring numbers of gun ownerships in society vs popular opinion regarding personal safety afforded by said ownerships. Kristof neatly concludes his argument with a one handed clap to Congress’
Bert represents as an everyman hero because he is brave, stands up for his beliefs and compassionate. In the court, Rachel pleads With Bert to change his mind and admit he did was wrong. As Rachel asks why he can't be on the right sides and pleaded guilty. Bert replies, “Be on your father's side and prove that I was wrong about teaching my students about evolution.” This concept shows bravery that Cates tells Rachel that he is going to fight for his belief that he was right. From the outcome of the trial, Bert does not know if he won or lost. As his attorney, Drummond says to him the preservation of the case gives you the strength to stand up against a law that restricts his own freedom to think and speak. This shows that Cates stood up for
Cerjak ,The English Journal, Vol. 76, No. 5 (Sep., 1987), pp. 55-57 Published by: National Council of Teachers of English
Webster’s Desk Dictionary of the English Language. New York: Portland House. 1990. Dictionary. Page 602
However, while writing the argumentative essay, it took much more than just asking myself a simple question. Since the topics of my body paragraphs were so diverse, I was forced to work harder at picturing the connections between all three of them. While I knew writing the process essay was difficult, when I began writing the argumentative essay, I knew it was going to be much more challenging. Nevertheless, after the paper was finally complete, my ability of writing transitional sentences was increasingly better due to the difficulty. Furthermore, I never would have examined so closely how to relate the ideas of college athletes’ monetary compensation to lawsuits being filed over disputes of unfairness (“Paying College Athletes” 3). Not only did the process essay help further my knowledge of transitional sentences, but the argumentative pushed it to the next
... to define a pragmatic language that can capture the true meaning of our thoughts and sentences in a formal language. This is significant because as often as we do stick to the Cooperative Principle and the maxims that Grice specifies, there are times where we stray from these cooperations to purposefully create implications. Because we do not normally ignore this Cooperative Principle without good reason, implicature is a strong way to get a point across. While Grice’s theory of implicature seems to fall short of setting up a complete evaluation process with which to decipher these points, there are some good things within his argument. Although Grice’s theory does not give a full solution to the formalist and infomalist problems or supply a flawless technique to evaluate implicature all the time, it is worth thinking about and applying to our everyday language.