Today we\u2019ll discuss a word and a phrase, either of which would sound fine in a casual exchange but could attract unwanted attention if used in formal writing.<\/p>\n
Ahold<\/strong>\u00a0 Although few people would notice anything amiss in a sentence like I wish I could get ahold of a good grammar book<\/em>, many editors would change get ahold of <\/em>to either get hold of<\/em> or get a hold of<\/em>.<\/p>\n Dictionaries differ on ahold<\/em>. Back in 1966, Random House\u2019s Dictionary of the English Language<\/em> listed ahold<\/em>, but called it \u201cinformal\u201d\u2014and the American College Dictionary<\/em> (1968), also from Random House, refused to list the word at all. (Maybe Random House wanted to discourage college kids from using it.)<\/p>\n Nor can ahold<\/em> be found in the American Heritage dictionary\u2019s 1980 edition. However, American Heritage\u2019s 2004 and 2011 editions include the word without comment.<\/p>\n A more recent dictionary,\u00a0Webster\u2019s New World<\/em> (2014), lists ahold<\/em> but, like Random House half a century ago, labels the word \u201cinformal.\u201d<\/p>\n Most of the language websites we checked did not recommend ahold<\/em>. Here are some examples: \u201cAhold<\/em> does not exist as a word in standard English.\u201d \u201cAhold<\/em> poses no problem in informal speech and writing, but it might be considered out of place in more formal contexts.\u201d \u201c<\/em>In standard English you just \u2018get hold\u2019 of something or somebody.\u201d<\/p>\n We found only one website that endorsed this word with any enthusiasm: \u201cDon\u2019t hold back on your use of ahold \u2026 a word recognized by Merriam-Webster, Garner\u2019s Modern American Usage and most other writing authorities.\u201d<\/p>\n We confirmed that the Merriam-Webster online dictionary does recognize ahold<\/em>, but the statement about \u201cmost other writing authorities\u201d conflicted with our own findings. And as for Bryan A. Garner\u2019s Dictionary of Modern American Usage<\/em>, all it says about ahold<\/em> is that \u201cit verges on being standard\u201d\u2014hardly a resounding endorsement.<\/p>\n In close proximity<\/strong>\u00a0 Proximity<\/em> does not mean \u201cdistance\u201d; it means \u201cnearness,\u201d so close proximity<\/em> means \u201cclose nearness.\u201d Besides its redundancy, in close proximity<\/em> takes three times as many words and three times as many syllables as are needed to express an elementary concept: nearby<\/em>.<\/p>\n You see in close proximity<\/em> all the time, and it always manages to sound ungainly and comically self-important. Here\u2019s a small sampling of what we found on the Internet: \u201cThe hotel is in close proximity [close] to the corporate, \ufb01nancial and fashionable heart of the city.\u201d \u201cInvestigators believe the aircraft went down after coming in close proximity [too close] to another plane.\u201d \u201c<\/em>The car\u2019s controls are in close proximity [within easy reach].\u201d<\/p>\n Traditional usage guides advise against close proximity<\/em>. Typical of these is Eric Partridge\u2019s Usage and Abusage<\/em>: \u201cSay close to<\/em> or near<\/em>, according to the context.\u201d John B. Bremner\u2019s Words on Words<\/em> finds the phrase too obviously silly to get worked up about. Bremner\u2019s droll entry under close proximity<\/em>: \u201cThe best kind.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Today we\u2019ll discuss a word and a phrase, either of which would sound fine in a casual exchange but could attract unwanted attention if used in formal writing. Ahold\u00a0 Although few people would notice anything amiss in a sentence like I wish I could get ahold of a good grammar book, many editors would change […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[24,10,12,37],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3431","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-adjectives-adverbs","category-definitions","category-effective-writing","category-spelling"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3431"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3431"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3431\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3431"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3431"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.grammarbook.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3431"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}