English Has a New Preposition, Because Internet.

[arthwollipot]

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...as-a-new-preposition-because-internet/281601/

The word "because," in standard English usage, is a subordinating conjunction, which means that it connects two parts of a sentence in which one (the subordinate) explains the other. In that capacity, "because" has two distinct forms. It can be followed either by a finite clause (I'm reading this because [I saw it on the web]) or by a prepositional phrase (I'm reading this because [of the web]). These two forms are, traditionally, the only ones to which "because" lends itself.

I mention all that ... because language. Because evolution. Because there is another way to use "because." Linguists are calling it the "prepositional-because." Or the "because-noun."

You probably know it better, however, as explanation by way of Internet—explanation that maximizes efficiency and irony in equal measure. I'm late because YouTube. You're reading this because procrastination. As the linguist Stan Carey delightfully sums it up: "'Because' has become a preposition, because grammar."

So do you like this trend in language evolution? I do.

 

[This is The End]

Well the original use was "because of", "because of the", or "because of a" and the like.

"I am late because of YouTube."

"I am late because of the internet."

I'm not sure if a meme that consists of merely dropping words from a phrase should make the remaining word have a new legitimate use.

 

[marplots]

Because of why?

 

[fishbob]

Just because.

 

[KatieG]

Because, just because!

(50 points to anyone who catches that musical reference)

 

[GlennB]

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...as-a-new-preposition-because-internet/281601/



So do you like this trend in language evolution? I do.

No, because ugly.

 

[Craig B]

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...as-a-new-preposition-because-internet/281601/



So do you like this trend in language evolution? I do.

Has it not just dropped the "of"? A similar word "lest" (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lest) has no "of". It is a conjunction, and surely "because" remains one, even if, like lest, it requires no of.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Because, just because!

(50 points to anyone who catches that musical reference)

Minus 50 points for you...

You left off the silly grin emote..

 

[Monketi Ghost]

With you, I kinda like it.
I used to be a crank about the English language but now recognize and appreciate its malleability.

 

[Fishstick]

My favorite usage of this in an exasperation context is "Why? Because reasons."

 

[aggle-rithm]

It was cute at first, but it's gotten old.

 

[malicus]

Dislike. Funny and acceptable as shorthand internet speak, but just plain weird for everyday 'proper' usage.

I remember when I first heard on American tv "I'll write you". Yuk.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Dislike. Funny and acceptable as shorthand internet speak, but just plain weird for everyday 'proper' usage.

I remember when I first heard on American tv "I'll write you". Yuk.

I'm too used to it to identify the problem. Omission?
"I'll write (to) you (a text/letter)"?

 

[malicus]

I'm too used to it to identify the problem. Omission?
"I'll write (to) you (a text/letter)"?

Yup, this bit. My English teacher would be spinning in his sandals.

 

[elgarak]

It's better than the old "because" as a simple statement ending the discussion.

We're doing this why? Because!

Now at least they give a hint what the cause is. It also appears to me that it developed from the "Because!" usage, because (har har) people noticed how unsatisfying the standalone "Because!' is.

 

[Checkmite]

I don't have a problem with evolution of language in general; however I'm a bit puzzled as to why this is offered as an example of "because" being a new preposition. In the instance given - "I am late because YouTube", well this is simply "I'm late because of YouTube" with the "of" left off; the message remains the same, so it doesn't make sense to me to assert that the sentence is mechanically different by virtue of the missing word.

 

[boooeee]

Dislike. Funny and acceptable as shorthand internet speak, but just plain weird for everyday 'proper' usage.

I remember when I first heard on American tv "I'll write you". Yuk.

And shorthand internet speak is prone to quick burning fads.

Have we reclassified "fail" as a noun because that's how everybody was using it 5 years ago?

 

[kajata]

You lost me at "subordinating conjunction".

 

[BowlOfRed]

I don't have a problem with evolution of language in general; however I'm a bit puzzled as to why this is offered as an example of "because" being a new preposition. In the instance given - "I am late because YouTube", well this is simply "I'm late because of YouTube" with the "of" left off; the message remains the same, so it doesn't make sense to me to assert that the sentence is mechanically different by virtue of the missing word.

Grammar Girl did a piece on this recently (actually written by Neal Whitman). I'm not "hip" enough to have heard it much, but it does seem to be a different usage than someone just dropping the "of".

http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/because-as-a-preposition

 

[Checkmite]

I'm still not convinced. It seems to me that "because" isn't actually what's being changed - it still means the same thing. What's being changed is the noun that comes afterwards.

For instance, "...because Internet". Because in this sentence means what "because" always means - "the following is the reason for the preceding". However, "Internet" in this sentence does not mean what it usually means - as used it does not strictly mean (the definition of "Internet"), but rather it represents an argument above and beyond that - perhaps, (the definition of "Internet"), plus certain unspoken implications posed by the existence of the "Internet".

Thus, I disagree that the way to describe this phenomenon is "because NOUN". I would say rather than "because" being used in a new way, it's what's being called the "noun" in that case isn't actually being used as a noun - or else, that it's the definition of "noun" that should change - perhaps to "a word specifying a particular person, place, thing, idea, or argument".