3 ms·
This sort of thing long pre-dates spell checkers, as other have pointed out. Here's an older example for you. The word "alright" existed fairly quietly and un
by JdeBP 7y ago
This sort of thing long pre-dates spell checkers, as other have pointed out. Here's an older example for you. The word "alright" existed fairly quietly and unobtrusively in the English language for decades, as a formation similar to "altogether" and "always", until Fowler and other authorities got hold of it after World War 1 and demonized it.
* http://jdebp.uk./FGA/all-right-variants.html http://jdebp.uk./FGA/all-right-variants.html
- tqkxzugoaupvwqr 7y agoI always considered “all right” to be incorrect. Interesting.
- chrismorgan 7y agoHuh, didn’t know “alright” wasn’t universally hunky-dory. In Australian English it’s a common word and that’s how it’s spelled, and I believe “all right” would be considered actively wrong.
- jfk13 7y agoFWIW, the Oxford English Dictionary lists it as all right; note that it is a distinct entry from an earlier (now obsolete) word alright meaning "exactly, just". Regarding the spelling, though, it notes: > The form alright is frequent, although more widespread in non-literary printed sources (e.g. newspapers and journals) than in literary texts. Compare the standard spellings of already (adj. and adv.), altogether (adj., n., and adv.), always (adv). Although these analogues exist, the form is strongly criticized in the vast majority of usage guides, but without cogent reasons. I suspect that while all right is generally regarded as the more "correct" form, alright will eventually be accepted as a valid alternative in modern usage, though traditionalists will be fighting a rearguard action for some years yet.