Devolution toward Simpler

“Do to limitations …”

Devolution toward Simpler, Idioms

I saw this in a technical document.

Problem:
“Do” is the wrong word here.

Explanation:
“Due” is the right word here because “due to” is an idiom that means attributable to.

The writer could have missed the mistake because “do” and “due” sound alike to most Americans.

The writer could have made the mistake because he or she did not know that “due” is the correct word.

In any case, I believe that use of “do” in place of “due” is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It’s simpler to write “do” (two letters) than to write “due” (three letters).

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following phrases (with the quotation marks) and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

  • “due to limitations” — 703,000 matches
  • “do to limitations” — 505 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the idiom correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of 1,392:1, which is excellent!

Solution:
“Due to limitations …”

“They brought back little momentos …”

Common English Blunders, Devolution toward Simpler, Nouns

I heard this yesterday during an HGTV “Design on a Dime” program.

Problem:
The noun is misspelled.

Explanation:
The noun “momento” is a Spanish word and means moment.

The noun “memento” is an English word and means keepsake or souvenir.

The host of the TV program was talking about how the interior designer was influenced by the souvenirs that the home owners brought home from their vacations, so “mementos” would have been the correct noun.

I believe that the use of “mementos” in place of “momentos” is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to say the initial “o” in “momentos” than to say the initial “e” in “mementos” (try it).

Solution:
“They brought back little mementos …”

“Limited Quanities”

Devolution toward Simpler, Misspellings, Nouns

I saw this in a television advertisement for a business named Surplus Furniture.

Problem:
The noun is misspelled.

Explanation:
The misspelling is obvious: “Quanities” should have been “Quantities” in the big headline in the TV commercial.

What is not as obvious, perhaps, is why the misspelling occurred.

Not enunciating distinctly the first ‘t’ in “quantities” is common among many American speakers, so the misspelling could be due to the headline writer unconsciously spelling “quantities” in the way that he or she heard the noun dictated by the furniture-store owner.

I also believe that the misspelling is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It’s simpler to drop the first ‘t’ than to include it.

For fun, I searched Google for each of the following spellings (without the quotation marks) and got about the indicated numbers of matches:

  • “quantities” — 50,800,000 matches
  • “quanities” — 165,000 matches

This tells me that Web authors have written the word correctly vs. incorrectly by a ratio of 308:1, which is a very good sign.

Solution:
“Limited Quantities”