Talk:thru
Thru is listed as "U.S. informal spelling of THROUGH" in some British English dictionaries, and that's only being polite. Other dictionaries list it as a variant of through, or don't mention it at all. Most computer spelling checkers will reject thru as an error. Through is be the preferred spelling in Wiki work. 71.116.90.227 07:46, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
- Uh yeah... OK. But for the purpose of Wiktionary, a thru entry is just fine, I'm sure you'd agree. Alexander 007 03:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- LOL ... My spell checker rejects irenicon as well but that doesn't mean its an error. There are a whole host of words that a spell-checker will reject that are correct. Brits still cling to colour (which is rejected by my spellchecker) ... different strokes for different folks! And if you're going to speak for Wiki, you should at least sign your post. --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! 20:09, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- I think there are two separate senses: "thru" as a nonstandard alternative spelling and "thru" as an abbreviation (it doesn't take a period at the end, but that's how it's used). The latter is less non-standard. I would also argue that "thru" in formal contexts is a stylistic error even among many of those who accept it in informal contexts. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Interesting thought that it is an abbreviation but I know of no one else who thinks of it that way. Nonetheless, it is not a stylistic error ... in fact, "stylistic error" is something of an oxymoron. It is a stylistic choice is not liked by those who are stuck on the non-phonetic and, truthfully, non-sensical spelling of through. In some gov't agencies in the US, thru is the preferr'd spelling. When I was a soldier and when I was a cop, we were told to note thru. I noted it thruout my university (undergrad and graduate) days and when I work'd at corporation. It most definitely is not an error (grammar, spelling, or style) ... it's only a choice.--AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
- I think there are two separate senses: "thru" as a nonstandard alternative spelling and "thru" as an abbreviation (it doesn't take a period at the end, but that's how it's used). The latter is less non-standard. I would also argue that "thru" in formal contexts is a stylistic error even among many of those who accept it in informal contexts. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
thru is more than a preposition[edit]
In the 1968 printing of Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language (College Edition): "thru (throo), prep., adv., adj. through." In the 1986 Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language(Second College Edition): "thru (throo), prep., adv., adj.shortened sp. of THROUGH" (Pat1932 20:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC))
Not Informal[edit]
I took the informal tag off (putting it back as it was). It is not fitting here. Thru has been noted formally in the US for many, many years. Take a look at the quotes. --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Dictionaries[edit]
thru is in the following dictionaries (“thru”, in OneLook Dictionary Search.): M-W, en.oxforddictionaries.com (as nonstandard), AHD, Collins, Macmillan, dictionary.cambridge.org, Webster's 1913. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:57, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
missing adjective sense[edit]
ie. "a through street" -- Mocha2007 (talk) 16:57, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Anecdote: The adjective sense can seen on street signs around the Northeast US. "NOT A THRU WAY", "NOT A THROUGH STREET", "NO THRU TRAFFIC". (This is different from "thruway"). 76.118.148.241 01:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)