Talk:moreso
Is it a word?
[edit]On onelook.com, "moreso" is not a word in any dictionary but this one. http://onelook.com/?w=moreso&ls=a
I bring this up because I recently tried to use the word and my spell checker flagged me. Thinking the spell checker was wrong, I looked it up there and found nothing but this dictionary. (Always a bad sign, as they have a good couple dozen it could appear in if it were a word.)
Also, I googled the word, and the first web site match: http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/moreso.html tells me that it must always be two words (if used at all).
The next three google hits: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002208.html http://forum.mtstars.com/word/v/1/4457.html and http://www.word-detective.com/back-a2.html
are all addressing the question of whether "moreso" is a word, another bad sign.
I used the word believing that it was a word. Now, I tend believe it is not one.
-- 76.26.150.161 03:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I looked at those links and they're a perfect example of prescriptivism. Especially the last one. Basically the guy in that last link has no concern for what people are actually writing, instead basing his judgment on some ethereal idea of what he personally thinks should be written. A language is determined by what its speakers say and write. If people start using moreso on a wide scale-- and they have-- and a dictionary or self-proclaimed expert claims otherwise.. then that dictionary or self-proclaimed expert is no longer talking about English. They're talking about some kind of fake English they invented in their heads. Language Lover 04:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
This site says the term is generally abused - http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/errors/moreso.html
- By "abused", do you mean "not used the way some people think it should" or "not used the way everyone uses it"? --EncycloPetey 01:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I’ve added some “Usage notes” and links – hope they help!
- Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 21:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
"More so" should always be spelled as two distinct words. It is also overused and misused.
-DJDaveMark
- Most words throughout history didn't start out with any educational sponsorship. What about the words tomorrow, terrific, and speakeasy?
-TheWham
- No, it's not a word, it's a typo (like "alot"). For one thing, it has no etymology (unlike "tomorrow", "terrific" and "speakeasy"). Also, the inclusion of "so" is very often tautological. (And I'd bet that least some of those citations are typographic errors.)--Person12 23:12, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
- Word Detective makes excellent points, writing that:
- What about its opposite construction, "less so"? Are we now to glop these together into "lesso"? Soon we'll be facing "inorderto" and "inspiteof," not to mention "nottomention." [1]--Person12 00:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I would agree with the position given by others that it is indeed a word, created through common usage in English, especially American English. I believe this site has a more useful overview of common usage with examples than many of these sites just pulled up through Google: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002208.html Since there is no way the claim can be backed up that ALL arbiters of English language agree on this, I am adding the qualifier "some" to this description of the propriety of this word. Jarnor23 00:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep using such barbaric constructions as "moreso", and we might even go so far as to say such nonsense as "into"! Heaven forbid! 66.87.2.46 21:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
What I've found is our language is being minimalized and fragmented, as well as de-punctuated and bastardized. Words commonly taught in public school English classes back in the Fifties are suddenly considered incorrect. Sorry, they're still words, at least as long as us oldsters who remember and stubbornly chose to continue using them are concerned. 'Moreso' is such a word, archaic, but still a word, as are 'into', 'onto', 'upon', 'awhile', 'any' and 'every' appended with various, 'alright', and 'nonetheless'. The purpose of any language is to communicate not obfuscate, yet obfuscation seems to be the current trend, and thank you so much MLA and MSWord. — This comment was unsigned.
31 May 2012 addition to Usage Notes
[edit]I've removed the paragraph added by 109.153.108.217 :
However, if used correctly, the "so" part stands in for "thus" or "the case" (as "so" has more than one meaning) for example: "It's moreso that 'moreso' just isn't used correctly, rather than it being a tautological monstrosity." In arbiter-friendly English, this would be: "It's more the case that 'moreso' just isn't used correctly..." Also, it seems logical that a statement containing 'moreso' should follow on from a clause or sentence expressing a comparison to what will be dictated as 'more' in the following clause or sentence.
Reasons:
1) Citations are needed for claims about "correct usage".
2) The statement about "so"s various meanings has no special relevance to "moreso" as opposed to 'more so'.
3) Example sentence expresses the (already obvious) POV.
4) What is "arbiter-friendly English"? Phrase is unlikely to help dictionary users.
5) "...it seems logical..." to who? Needs citation/substantiation.--Person12 (talk) 16:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
See also: alot. Really?
[edit]I found that almost offensive since anyone pedantic enough to look up “moreso” as one word is probably already aware that a lot is always and forever two words. They’re not really comparable, one is a typo and the other is either archaic or just infrequent but definitely not incorrect.