Jump to content

Irregardless

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 216.9.250.118 (talk) at 15:08, 9 August 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Look up irregardless in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Irregardless is a term meaning in spite of or anyway, that has caused controversy since it first appeared in the early twentieth century. It is generally listed in dictionaries as "incorrect" or "nonstandard".

Origin

The origin of irregardless is not known for certain, but the consensus among references is that it is a blend of irrespective and regardless, both of which are commonly accepted standard English words. By blending these words, an illogical word is created. "Since the prefix ir- means 'not' (as it does with irrespective), and the suffix -less means 'without,' irregardless is a double negative."[1]

Irregardless is primarily found in North America, most notably in Boston and surrounding areas, where for instance, it was used in the title of a poetry evening 'irregardless of content' at The Baron of Srebrenica, primarily to keep it in circulation. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, and was first acknowledged in 1912 by the Wentworth American Dialect Dictionary as originating from western Indiana. Barely a decade later, the usage dispute over irregardless was such that, in 1923, Literary Digest published an article titled "Is There Such a Word as Irregardless in the English Language?"[2]

Appearance in reference books

One way to follow the progress of and sentiments toward irregardless is by studying how it is described in references throughout the twentieth century. Webster’s New International Dictionary (2nd. Ed. Unabridged) described the word as an erroneous or humorous form of regardless, and attributed it to the United States. Although irregardless was beginning to make its way into the American lexicon, it still was not universally recognized and was missing completely from Fowler's Modern English Usage,[3] published in 1965, nor is irregardless mentioned under the entry for regardless therein. In the last twenty-five years, irregardless has become a common entry in dictionaries and usage reference books. It appears in a wide range of dictionaries including: Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged (1961, repr. 2002),[4] The Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology (1988), The American Heritage Dictionary (Second College Edition, 1991),[5] Microsoft Encarta College Dictionary (2001), and Webster’s New World College Dictionary (Fourth Edition, 2004).[6]

Prescriptive vs. descriptive

The approach taken by lexicographers when documenting a word's uses and limitations can be prescriptive or descriptive. The method used with irregardless is overwhelmingly prescriptive. Much of the criticism comes from the illogical double negative pairing of the prefix (ir-) and suffix (-less), and the argument that irregardless is not, or should not be, a word at all because it lacks the antecedents of a "bona fide nonstandard word." A counterexample is provided in ain't, which has an "ancient genealogy," at which scholars would not dare level such criticisms.[1]

The descriptive approach to "irregardless" is to note that it is considered nonstandard by educated people.

Summary

Irregardless seems to be moving slowly in the direction of standardization. It has gone from nonexistence in the 1910 publication of Etymological Dictionary of the English Language,[7] to being a normality in modern dictionary publications, and it frequently occurs in edited professional prose. The fact that its listing as a "humorous usage" has practically disappeared today supplies further evidence in favor of acceptance. Some argue that adding a second negative to a word like regardless is a humorous way to illustrate an underabundance of irregard. However, strong resistance to the word still remains.

Australian linguist Pam Peters (The Cambridge Guide to English Usage, 2004) suggests that irregardless has become fetishized, since natural examples of this word in corpora of written and spoken English are greatly outnumbered by examples where it is in fact only cited as an incorrect term.

The term "irregardless" has begun to move towards acceptance because incorrect words or grammatical conventions are absorbed by the English language based on common usage. It is apparent that the word originated from regional deviations and was subsequently re-introduced to the wider English-speaking community, and thus the use of the term should be avoided if one takes the position that this word should not enter common use.

  • In the Family Guy episode "Lois Kills Stewie" (Part 2), Stewie threatens to consign anyone who uses irregardless to a work camp.
  • In a second season episode ("Irregarding Steve") of American Dad, Steve Smith and Roger the alien make fun of Stan Smith when he uses the term. Steve remarks, "Irregardless? That's not even a real word. You're affixing the negative prefix 'ir-' to 'regardless', but, as 'regardless' is already negative, it's a logical absurdity!"
  • In the short film The Parlor two characters argue over the term:
    • Joey: "Irregardless, she's a bitch."
    • Beth: "Irregardless isn't even a word."
    • Joey: "Yes it is, it means without lack of regard."
  • In the movie The Hebrew Hammer, the main character mentions the term: "I guess I could be chalant about it, but then again I’m not even so sure if that’s a word. Listen Chief, we could stand around arguing all day, making up words like chalant and irregardless, but I got a case to crack.”

-Corey Hilton once used the word by accident in Montreal and has sinçe felt like a retard

References

  1. ^ b Soukhanov, Anne H., ed. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. 3rd Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992.
  2. ^ Partridge, Eric, ed. Origins: A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English. New York: Macmillan, 1966.
  3. ^ Barnhart, Robert K., ed. The Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology. H. W. Wilson Company, 1988.
  4. ^ Rooney, Dr. Kathy, ed. Microsoft Encarta College Dictionary. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2001.
  5. ^ Murray, James, et al., eds. The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd Ed. Vol. VIII. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.
  6. ^ Fowler, H[enry] W[atson], and Sir Ernest Gowers, eds. Fowler's Modern English Usage. 2nd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1965.
  7. ^ Gove, Phillip B., ed. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster, 1981.
  8. ^ Berube, Margery S., ed. The American Heritage Dictionary. 2nd College Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1991.
  9. ^ Agnes, Michael, ed. Webster's New World College Dictionary. 4th Ed. Cleveland, Ohio: Wiley Publishing, 2004.
  10. ^ Skeat, W. W., ed. Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910.
  11. ^ Kipfer, Barbara Ann, ed. Roget’s 21st Century Thesaurus. New York: Dell Publishing, 1992.
  12. ^ Flerner, Stuart and Jess Stein, eds. The Random House Thesaurus. College Ed. New York: Random House, 1984.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Irregardless&oldid=230820068"