I like to think I’m pretty well acquainted with language irritations (yes, I’m refusing to use the word ‘bugbear’). But yesterday, two people picked me up on one I’d never considered: as to.
I’d written a guide to using ellipses and asked for feedback from my colleagues. Both questioned the as to in the following sentence.
In the following three cases, first consider whether you really need an ellipsis. Often, when the omission is at the start or end of a sentence, you can simply quote the remaining part without causing any confusion as to the meaning. However, sometimes an ellipsis is necessary for clarity.
It had never occurred to me, so I thought I’d ask Twitter. It turns out that objection is pretty widespread: as to was variously described as ‘faux formalism’, ‘pompous’ and ‘horrid’ – the kind of language that would be ‘written by a man in a bow tie’ and would ‘make one sound like a copper’. Well. That’s me told.
So, while I make no promises as to swearing off as to altogether, I’ll certainly be thinking before I write it again.
Here’s the Twitter conversation, if you’re interested. I’d also be curious to hear what others make of @catordog2′s claim that my use of any could change the meaning of the sentence. I’ll own up to it being superfluous (though I have chosen to retain it as I think it makes for a gentler tone, which is what I am going for here), but don’t see how it can change the meaning.
And, in case you’re wondering, I changed my as to to over.
Edit: in a classic case of oh-dear-it’s-already-been-written-and-better, I’d like to recommend Stan Carey’s post on as to. It’s far more sensible and comprehensive. 
‘As to’ is fine: clean and concise. Others might add more words and say it in a flowery fashion, but they would not enhance the meaning.
It’s ‘any’ that you have to be careful with. Through regular misuse, it can now define a writer as a lazy, couldn’t-give-a-shit type of person. The bus fails to arrive, your train is cancelled, a Gatwick flight is redirected to Aberdeen – and all you get is an apology for ‘any’ inconvenience. However, surely your use of ‘any’ was perfectly valid, suggesting ‘a risk or possibility of confusion’.
Comment by Alistair Dabbs — December 21, 2011 @ 10:42 pm |
Ah, “over”. When I saw the question on Twitter I was trying to think of something to use instead of “as to”, and could only think of phrases that were more wordy. Thanks!
Comment by Anke Wehner — December 22, 2011 @ 7:42 am |
The biggest problem with as to could be that a lot of people have a problem with as to. The Fowler brothers took a strong stand against it in The King’s English, and ever since then it has reappeared occasionally in peeve lists and usage guides. I find that it tends to be resorted to as a vague, default preposition when the most direct or appropriate one doesn’t come immediately to mind. So it is subject to overuse — especially in semi-formal speech — and then hostility. But that’s just my subjective impression. In the example you cite, I think as to is fine, but I would be inclined to use over instead.
P.S. I wrote about this a few years ago (back when hardly anyone was reading or commenting on Sentence first). I have to say, I prefer your post’s title.
P.P.S. Wait, you wear a bow tie?
Comment by Stan — December 22, 2011 @ 11:06 am |
The Boss uses ‘as to’ in “This Hard Land”. Never seen him wearing a bow-tie.
‘Hey there mister can you tell me what happened to the seeds I’ve sown/
Can you give me a reason sir as to why they’ve never grown…’
Here ends my in-depth analysis.
Comment by Michelle — December 22, 2011 @ 7:28 pm |
Alistair – yes, my use of any was intended to soften. There were suggestions it should be removed, or that ‘without confusing the meaning’ would be better. However, I do stand by it on this occasion – I think it adds a certain gentleness. ‘Without confusing the meaning’ I find quite abrupt, and subtly different. It suggests that my reader may end up confused, but I was referring to the possibility of my reader’s reader being confused.
Anke – yes, over seemed the best option, though some people suggested about – which I didn’t think was quite right.
Stan – indeed, all things in moderation. I too think as to is fine in this example, but over does the job perfectly well too. And I’ll be keeping an eye on my usage in future!
Michelle – I like your in-depth analysis. And I am so listening to I’m on Fire on the way home now!
Comment by substuff — December 22, 2011 @ 8:27 pm |
“Over” looks bizarre to me. I think I’d have been far more likely to re-read that part if it said “over”. “As to”, on the other hand, is concise and clear and says exactly what you mean. A very odd thing to pick up on. As for accusing it of being “archaic”, words fail me.
Comment by George Cook — January 10, 2012 @ 5:11 pm |
Aha! Thanks for the support, George!
Comment by substuff — January 10, 2012 @ 5:52 pm |
“As to” is fine surely? clear and concise, means what it says. What about “regarding” Is that ok I use it quite a bit? “Over”, seems clumsy to me, “about” I don’t mind either. Look at me, joining in a grammar debate!
Comment by kosmicklown — January 21, 2012 @ 3:41 am |