It’s been almost 50 years, but the sound
still is sharp and clear – a distinctive SNAP! shooting across the room as C.E.
Shuford opened the pages of the North
Texas Daily to begin the weekly Slash session for student editors.
Shuford’s theatrical beginning to the UNT faculty’s
weekly critique of the student newspaper always sent a shiver down the spines
of Daily staff members as we huddled
at the far end of the classroom and waited for the beatings to commence.
Slash sessions were aptly named. Faculty
members were merciless in their criticism and sparing in their praise, using
the mandatory gatherings as a teaching tool, certainly, but also as an
opportunity to put a cap on the soaring egos of their young charges – to demonstrate
that we weren’t quite as smart as we thought we were.
Keith Shelton, a hard-bitten political
reporter for the Dallas Times Herald
in a previous life, concentrated on reporting shortcomings. Junetta Davis, a
pioneering woman journalist who had excelled in a male-dominated Associated
Press before turning to teaching, drilled us for copy-editing mistakes. Smitty
Kiker, a genial man with an easy laugh and a sharp bullshit detector, made
occasional appearances to scold the photographers.
Fierce
as a tiger
Then there was Shuford, known by
generations of J-students as “Papa” and the epitome of the gracious Southern
gentleman. But in the classroom and during Slash, he was fierce as a snarling
tiger and an uncompromising champion of good grammar and clear, uncluttered
writing.
We respected – and feared – him the most.
When I was a senior, the student chapter of the Society of Professional
Journalists gave him an engraved meat cleaver. No man deserved it more.
At least once during every Slash, and
sometimes more, Shuford would sniff disgustedly, “Faulty due to in this story” or “Faulty due to here AND here.”
Once, he dismissively thrust an entire
sports page aside, grumbling irately, “Faulty due tos – everywhere.”
I endured this avalanche of “faulty due tos” for several weeks before my
curiosity got the best of me. I was afraid to approach the sainted Shuford, so
I sought out Shelton, who was the Daily’s
faculty adviser.
“Mr. Shelton,” I asked, “what in the hell
is a ‘faulty due to?’ Mr. Shuford
talks about them all the time.”
“Beats me,” he said with a grin. “Let me
see if I can find out.”
Sensible
advice
A couple of days later, he called me over.
“As best as I can tell, it’s OK to use due to as an adjective, but you should
never use it as a preposition,” he said.
“Huh?” I replied eloquently. “I don’t get
it.”
“Neither do I,” Shelton admitted with a
shrug. “My advice is that whenever you feel compelled to use due to, use because of instead. As far as I know, there’s no such thing as a ‘faulty
because of.’”
Keith Shelton’s sensible advice no doubt
would be viewed dimly by grammar’s high priesthood. But it has stood me in good
stead for my entire career. As far as I know, I haven’t committed a “faulty due to” in several decades. Or allowed
writers I edit to do so.
This is the Grammar Goat blog, however, so
an expedition to unravel the mysteries of the “faulty due to” seems in order.
Merriam-Webster’s
Dictionary of English Usage sums things up rather well.
“The basic argument is this: Due to is all right when it clearly has
a noun or pronoun to modify or when it follows a linking verb,” it says.
For example:
The
candidate’s landslide win was due to a superior get-out-the-vote campaign.
My
fat belly is due to a fondness for chocolate donuts.
By contrast, because of is correct when there is no linking verb.
For example:
The
candidate’s landslide was achieved because of a superior get-out-the-vote
campaign.
My
belly has ballooned because of a fondness for chocolate donuts.
“However,” notes Edward D. Johnson in The Handbook of Good English, “because of rather than due to is preferred with a verb in expletive constructions.” That is, when
it or there represent a subject or object referred to later in the
sentence.
For example:
It
was because of a superior get-out-the-vote campaign that the candidate won by a
landslide.
It
was because of my fondness for chocolate donuts that my belly ballooned.
Technically
wrong
Due
to
is commonly used without a verb, Johnson says, particularly when it begins a sentence.
Technically, it’s wrong, but acceptance of that usage is growing. (More on this
later.)
For example:
Due
to my love of chocolate donuts, my belly has ballooned.
Due
to a superior get-out-the-vote campaign, the candidate won by a landslide.
Many modern grammarians are tired of the
centuries-old dispute over how and when due
to should be used. They urge an end to the bickering, a position Shuford no
doubt would have considered cowardice in the face of the enemy.
“There has never been a grammatical ground
for objection (to the use of due to),
although the objection formulated in the early part of this century persists in
the minds of some usage commentators,” Merriam-Webster says.
The objection referred to by
Merriam-Webster is the use of due to
as a preposition.
For example:
Wrong The handsome bachelor raised the suspicions
of his neighbors due to his irregular
nocturnal habits.
Correct
The handsome bachelor
raised the suspicions of his neighbors because of his irregular nocturnal habits.
Wrong I hate Brussels sprouts due
to the fact they smell like farts.
Correct I hate Brussels sprouts because they
smell like farts.
(Sometimes
recasting the sentence avoids the problem altogether and provides a better result.
This is true of many grammatical dilemmas. When in doubt, rewrite!)
No
solid reason
Merriam-Webster, in a definitive judgment
that must have Papa Shuford rolling in his grave, states flatly, “There is no
solid reason to avoid using due to.”
Theodore Bernstein admits in The Careful Writer that objections to due to are fading and predicts they eventually
will disappear altogether. For the time being, however, he urges caution.
“The careful writer, who does not wish to
be suspected of negligence, will in the meanwhile use because of, which has a less casual flavor and is above suspicion
grammatically,” he said. “… Due to in
the sense of because of still has not
made the grade, though it will.”
I’ll only add this, with a tip of the hat
to my mentor, Keith Shelton. In each of the examples above where due to is used correctly, because of works equally well.
I’ll stick to what works. If it ain’t
broke, don’t fix it.
