Did you notice the grammatical atrocity in the title of this post?
Neither did our local transit authority, the MBTA, when it sent out a tweet like that after a person was struck and killed by a train. Some people were worried about the victim, I suppose, but others were outraged about that “due to” in the tweet.
Huh? I know the issue here, but I’d never heard the one about fiduciary responsibility.
I decided to find out what my cold-eyed editors at work have to say about “due to,” so I checked out our Writer’s Guide. Here’s what they say:
“Due to” should only be used as an adjective, not a preposition.
Well, that certainly clears everything up. Here’s how I understand this persnickety rule: Use “due to” when you can substitute “caused by” or “attributable to,” and not when you can substitute “because of.” Which means, in effect, that it should only be used after a copulative verb like “is.”
At work we are responsible for an online help system containing well over two million words. Apparently having nothing better to do, I did an online search to find out how many uses of “due to” we’ve got. The result: 140. Then I did a random check to see whether our highly experienced writers were following the editors’ persnickety rule. The answer? We’re a lot closer to the MBTA than to Mr. Stephen Wojnar. Almost every “due to” in our Help system is a “because of,” not an “attributable to.” What’s up with that?
My interpretation is that, even though our cold-eyed editors may know the rule, the “incorrect’ usage is so common that even they don’t spot it.
Bryan Garner in his Dictionary of Modern American Usage includes “due to” among his “skunked terms” — words so fraught with controversy that you’re better off just not using them, at least until the traditionalists die off. Hopefully used to be the standard bearer for skunked terms, although by now the odor around that word has mostly disappeared. I bet that, in a hundred years, “due to” will also smell just fine, and the MBTA will have won.