Talk:due to

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Isn't "due to" an adjective? My dictionary confirmed it. Although it is used as a preposition in most dictionaries it is an adjective. Saurael 17:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how, on its own, it can be an adjective. What exactly does the dictionary say, and which dict is it? Equinox 17:48, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I have a Cambridge dictionary so it's about British English and it considers "due to" an adjective, so does an online version http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=24184&dict=CALD. Also I've noticed it on a podcast here: http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/because-due-to-since-as.aspx. Saurael 17:55, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
"Due to" on its own can't be an adjective. In phrases that contain it (e.g. "the cancellation was due to bad weather") it could be regarded as adjectival, but alone it cannot. Is that the cause of confusion? A similar case: in trouble could be adjectival, but in couldn't. Equinox 18:00, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Are you really sure? The OED lists due to as a prepositional phrase under the adjective entry for due. SemperBlotto 18:03, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Most articles on the Internet, that I've found, and my grammar book treat "due to" as an adjective. Maybe it could be considered an adjectival prepositional phrase. English is not my first language so I can't be sure. Saurael 18:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Consider: "Due to the rain, they didn't go to the concert." Though some might dislike the expression stylistically, it is difficult to claim that most people find it ungrammatical. If "due" or "due to" is an adjective, what is the nominal it is modifying? If "due to the rain" is an adjectival phrase, what is it modifying? I believe the phrase is a "sentence adverb", actually a clausal adverb, modifying "they didn't go to the concert".
CGEL explicitly distinguishes the grammar of the optional "to" sense of due#Adjective and the mandatory "to" sense. (CGEL does its best to avoid compound prepositions, limiting them to a very few. Their approach makes "due" itself to be a preposition that takes a prepositional phrase as a complement.) DCDuring TALK * Holiday Greetings! 19:16, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster says [1]:

The objection to due to as a preposition is only a continuation of disagreements that began in the 18th century over the proper uses of owing and due. Due to is as grammatically sound as owing to, which is frequently recommended in its place. It has been and is used by reputable writers and has been recognized as standard for decades. There is no solid reason to avoid due to.

-- Beland (talk) 17:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)