Where's Al?

Al + though: The case of the missing morpheme

You remember Al, known for close relationships with ready, ways, most, so and, on certain more formal occasions, beit. Sometimes Al keeps bad company with right or that odd one, ot.

We always used to see those two nudged up against each other, shoulder to shoulder, to start a sentence or a clause. United, although means much the same thing as while or despite that. But Al doesn't appear with though very much anymore. And after so many years, too. They used to be inseparable. Can't help but wonder what caused the break-up.

Well, these things happen: two parties grow apart and go separate ways. Everyone adjusts and carries on. Good. It's all about adapting, evolving.

Trouble is, too many people have not only accepted this split, they've helped it along. Without much concern for either of them, they're forcing though to get the job done without any help from faithful old pal Al. Lately, surprising numbers of writers aren't inviting Al anymore, and though by itself is doing more of the heavy lifting--but clearly isn't up to the job. Example:

"Though they took the alibis into account, the jurors found the defendants guilty."

No, no, no. Sounds awkward, and is technically wrong: though is straining under the burden of being the first to arrive, not to mention the weight of that capital T. Needs an assistant. If Al isn't available, ask Even. Gotta have one or the other:

"Although they took . . ." or "Even though they took . . ."

For me and many others, coming upon a solo though where Al should be leading the way results in a painful coup de mot (or "word attack," as a reading specialist once put it). If Al isn't there and should be, it's as if my brain just got beaned, or I've caught my heel in a lexical hole where a paver should have been.

Stand-alone

Complicating the matter is that though has meaning in its own right, and can stand alone as a comma-pair "aside." In mid-sentence it works like however: "The jurors were sorry, though, that the sentence was so harsh."

(By the way, while I'm thinking of it: though is incorrect as a substitute for if. "As though"? As if!)

What amazes me is that more and more writers use although and though interchangeably. I've seen it in countless articles in the NYT, Chicago Trib, Time and many other majors. How do these writers determine when to use which? I can't figure out their rationale from the context. Or is it just "lazy writing"?

Here's an example: Scott Joseph, restaurant reviewer for the Orlando Sentinel, managed to use both although and the erroneous though in two identical constructs within the space of about 30 words (itals mine):

"Both are stylishly hip, though in different ways . . . They part ways in the area of food, although both serve a similar mix . . ." ["Beluga is very good," OS, 6.4.06.]

Go ask Al

I'm glad that many writers are still meticulously consistent in the correct use of although, bless 'em. And it's true that at some point, usage rules will catch up with the increasing misuse of though.

But they haven't yet, so please ask Al to show up.