due to of

[Arnold M. Zwicky]

On Aug 13, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Jerry Cohen wrote:

>  I vote for blending, a very widespread linguistic feature. No
> doubt "due to of" is inadvertent in at least some cases, although
> in others it might be spoken/written in imitation of someone who
> did say it inadvertently.

i thought that this is what i said (though i allowed for editing
error as another possible original source).

i tried to separate origin from transmission when i wrote:

no doubt "due to of" originated in an error of one sort or another,
but now it seems to have a life of its own for some people.

(that is, people are picking it up from one another.)

arnold

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org