The Cincinnati Enquirer carried a pleasant story in May about the retirement of a local judge after 65 years on the bench. The old gentleman found it hard to quit. “He said he would be back in the office today for awhile.”

On Aug. 5, The Washington Post carried a friendly piece on the approaching retirement of Sen. Ernest F. Hollings of South Carolina. Recalling his contributions to fiscal discipline, the Post noted that his efforts “helped reduce budget deficits for a while.”

This is today’s recurring question: Is it “awhile,” one word, or “a while,” two words? We discussed the matter 18 months ago, but it’s worth another round.

In “Modern American Usage,” Bryan A. Garner briskly disposes of the issue in a single paragraph: “As a noun, spell it as two words (he rested for a while.) As an adverb, spell it as one (he rested awhile.) When the choice is between ‘for a while’ and ‘awhile,’ prefer the latter.”

The editors of Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage give the question a page and a half. At last they reach a thundering conclusion: “It is obvious that your using ‘awhile’ or ‘a while’ makes no great difference to the reader. Both forms are etymologically and semantically identical.”

In the absence of ironclad rules, the editors say, “you can follow your own feel for the expression and write it as one word when that seems right and as two words

when that seems right.”

The same deference to the “feel” of a phrase applies to many other questions of usage, e.g., the prepositions “amid” and “amidst.” You may stare at them all night, Matilda, and not discern a dime’s worth of difference between them. Random House dates “amid” from 1000, “amidst” from 1250. After all these years, the choice is wholly a matter of style, of context, of feel. “Jorgensen’s pass, incomplete, fell amid a swarm of defenders.” “In Rome we walked in silence amidst the ancient ruins.”

An alternative to “amid” and “amidst” sometimes can be found in “among.” This too is a matter of ear: “The works of Carlyle will not be found among his bedside books.” Several 19th-century grammarians insisted on a simplistic rule for “among”: Use “between” for two objects, and use “among” for three or more. Thus, “The estate was divided between Douglas and Lucille,” but “The poll was taken among fraternity members.” The rule breaks down in the real world of actual usage, but it does well in theory.

An inquiry came the other day from Terri Fetherolf of Creola, Ohio. Several tourist destinations are near her home. She asks, are the sites “historic” or “historical”? The distinction is clear, though it’s often blurred. Momentous events are historic; books about the events are historical. The New York Times got it right on Aug. 11 in a story about original copies of the Bill of Rights: “According to historical records, an Ohio infantryman walked off with North Carolina’s copy in 1865.”

In the foregoing paragraph I remarked upon a distinction “though it’s often blurred.” Is there any difference between “though” and “although”? The only distinction worth consideration is that “though” has one syllable and “although” has two. Cadence counts. Otherwise the two conjunctions are all the same.

What about the verbs “to career” and “to careen”? On the same day the Times was writing about the Bill of Rights, a correspondent in Omak, Wash., was writing about a risky horse race. The riders charge toward a precipice and “career” down 200 feet. Right! The new Webster’s 11th Collegiate says to career is “to go at top speed, esp. in a headlong manner.” To careen is “to sway from side to side; lurch.”

Trouble is, the verbs occasionally overlap. But either way you’re asking for a ticket. Slow down! Buckle up! And play around with our beautiful and exasperating tongue.

James Kilpatrick is a syndicated columnist.

Copy the Story Link