Greetings, Group.

Which is correct: different from, different than or different to?

I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
does that hold true in this case?

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
> Greetings, Group.
>
> Which is correct: different from, different than or different to?
>
> I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
> does that hold true in this case?

'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
characteristically American.

AmE:
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>

BrE:
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>

For these sorts of questions, refer to Fowler:

"...The commonly expressed
view that different should only be followed
by from and never by to or than is
not supportable in the face of past and
present evidence or of logic, though the
distribution of the constructions is not
straightforward.

(a) History. The OED lists examples of
each of the three constructions from
the dates indicated: different from 1590,
different to 1526, different than 1644...

<https://alexandriaesl.pbworks.com/f/The+New+Fowler%27s+Modern+English+Usage.pdf>

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:22:57 +0000
Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

> Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
> > Greetings, Group.
> >
> > Which is correct: different from, different than or different to?
> >
> > I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
> > does that hold true in this case?
>
> 'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
> characteristically American.
>
> AmE:
> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>
>
I'd say that usage is differently correct.

> BrE:
> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>
>

one object is similar to another object, or different from it.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

Hibou wrote:

> Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
>> Greetings, Group.
>>
>> Which is correct: different from, different than or different to?
>>
>> I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
>> does that hold true in this case?

> 'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
> characteristically American.

> AmE:
> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>

> BrE:
> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>

And"different to" is characteristically British, though I hear it in New
Mexico as a hispanicism.

--
Jerry Friedman

On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:

> Hibou wrote:
>
>> Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
>>> Greetings, Group.
>>>
>>> Which is correct: different from, different than or different to?
>>>
>>> I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
>>> does that hold true in this case?
>
>> 'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
>> characteristically American.
>
>> AmE:
>> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>
>>
>
>> BrE:
>> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>
>>
>
> And"different to" is characteristically British,

but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it was
very common.

> though I hear it in New
> Mexico as a hispanicism.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 2024-03-14 07:22, Hibou wrote:
> Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
>> Greetings, Group.
>>
>> Which is correct:  different from, different than or different to?
>>
>> I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
>> does that hold true in this case?
>
> 'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
> characteristically American.
>
> AmE:
> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>
>
> BrE:
> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>

CdnE:
'different than'
'differs from'

--
I have a boomerang that won't come back. I call it my stick.

On 14-Mar-24 15:03, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:
>
>> Hibou wrote:
>>
>>> Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
>>>> Greetings, Group.
>>>>
>>>> Which is correct:  different from, different than or different to?
>>>>
>>>> I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
>>>> does that hold true in this case?
>>
>>> 'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
>>> characteristically American.
>>
>>> AmE:
>>> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>
>>
>>> BrE:
>>> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>
>>
>> And"different to" is characteristically British,
>
> but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it was
> very common.

Yes. I'm bored of this sort of thing.

--
Sam Plusnet

Le 14/03/2024 à 20:19, Sam Plusnet a écrit :
> On 14-Mar-24 15:03, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:
>>>
>>> And "different to" is characteristically British,
>>
>> but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it was
>> very common.
>
> Yes.  I'm bored of this sort of thing.

I know you said that deliberately, but Ouch! all the same.

I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.
I'd've thought their correct usage would have been absorbed with the
maternal milk, or at worst shortly after weaning.

Le 15/03/2024 à 06:42, Hibou a écrit :
>
> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.
> I'd've thought their correct usage would have been absorbed with the
> maternal milk, or at worst shortly after weaning.

Mind you, a Whitehall civil servant once took me to task, remarking that
he was surprised that a "classicist" like myself should say "under the
circumstances".

Strong stuff - and I've never worked out whether he genuinely mistook me
for a classicist or was being sarcastic.

It was food for thought, and set me thinking. I understand modern
practice is to use 'in' when circumstances are, shall we say, just
loafing about in a disinterested sort of way, and 'under' when they
start throwing their weight about and become compelling.

On 2024-03-15 06:42:31 +0000, Hibou said:

> Le 14/03/2024 à 20:19, Sam Plusnet a écrit :
>> On 14-Mar-24 15:03, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:
>>>>
>>>> And "different to" is characteristically British,
>>>
>>> but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it was
>>> very common.
>>
>> Yes.  I'm bored of this sort of thing.
>
> I know you said that deliberately, but Ouch! all the same.
>
> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.

Not just native speakers. Prepositions are the most difficult words to
translate, because there is rarely a 1:1 correspondence between
languages. An example is Spanish para/por, which occupy much the same
semantic space as English for/by, but the diucide it up differently.

> I'd've thought their correct usage would have been absorbed with the
> maternal milk, or at worst shortly after weaning.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 2024-03-15, Hibou wrote:

> Le 15/03/2024 à 06:42, Hibou a écrit :
>>
>> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.
>> I'd've thought their correct usage would have been absorbed with the
>> maternal milk, or at worst shortly after weaning.

FSVO "trouble". I think we just have to accept that there can be more
than one idiomatic preposition for many situations.

> Mind you, a Whitehall civil servant once took me to task, remarking that
> he was surprised that a "classicist" like myself should say "under the
> circumstances".

I guess you're "in the middle of the circumstances", but then "circum"
is superfluous, so "in the middle of the stances".

> Strong stuff - and I've never worked out whether he genuinely mistook me
> for a classicist or was being sarcastic.
>
> It was food for thought, and set me thinking. I understand modern
> practice is to use 'in' when circumstances are, shall we say, just
> loafing about in a disinterested sort of way, and 'under' when they
> start throwing their weight about and become compelling.

Ha!

--
I don't want something better than coffee! I want coffee!
---Kathryn Janeway

El Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:21:57 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden escribió:

> On 2024-03-15 06:42:31 +0000, Hibou said:
>
>> Le 14/03/2024 à 20:19, Sam Plusnet a écrit :
>>> On 14-Mar-24 15:03, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>>> On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:
>>>>>
>>>>> And "different to" is characteristically British,

It's what I say.

>>>> but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it
>>>> was very common.
>>>
>>> Yes.  I'm bored of this sort of thing.
>>
>> I know you said that deliberately, but Ouch! all the same.
>>
>> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.
>
> Not just native speakers. Prepositions are the most difficult words to
> translate, because there is rarely a 1:1 correspondence between
> languages. An example is Spanish para/por, which occupy much the same
> semantic space as English for/by, but the diucide it up differently.

Brits really struggle with this. One just has to *know*.

Somebody told a Spanish friend (now dead), that "por" was always "by" -
"Hecho por mí para mí" - made by me for me.

Then I pointed at the serviette on the bar "Gracias por su visita".

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es

On 2024-03-15 10:44:37 +0000, Paul Carmichael said:

> El Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:21:57 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden escribió:
>
>> On 2024-03-15 06:42:31 +0000, Hibou said:
>>
>>> Le 14/03/2024 à 20:19, Sam Plusnet a écrit :
>>>> On 14-Mar-24 15:03, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And "different to" is characteristically British,
>
> It's what I say.
>
>>>>> but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it
>>>>> was very common.
>>>>
>>>> Yes.  I'm bored of this sort of thing.
>>>
>>> I know you said that deliberately, but Ouch! all the same.
>>>
>>> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.
>>
>> Not just native speakers. Prepositions are the most difficult words to
>> translate, because there is rarely a 1:1 correspondence between
>> languages. An example is Spanish para/por, which occupy much the same
>> semantic space as English for/by, but the diucide it up differently.
>
> Brits really struggle with this. One just has to *know*.
>
> Somebody told a Spanish friend (now dead), that "por" was always "by" -
> "Hecho por mí para mí" - made by me for me.
>
> Then I pointed at the serviette on the bar "Gracias por su visita".

Exactly. A better example than I could think up.

Incidentally, my "the diucide it up" was a less than obvious typo for
"they divide it up".

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 15/03/24 21:27, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2024-03-15, Hibou wrote:

>> Mind you, a Whitehall civil servant once took me to task, remarking that
>> he was surprised that a "classicist" like myself should say "under the
>> circumstances".
>
> I guess you're "in the middle of the circumstances", but then "circum"
> is superfluous, so "in the middle of the stances".

My Latin is admittedly weak. Even so, that "in the middle" looks wrong
to me. I would have thought that the "circum" means "around", i.e.
you're around the boundary of the stances, not in the middle.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On 2024-03-15, Peter Moylan wrote:

> On 15/03/24 21:27, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2024-03-15, Hibou wrote:
>
>>> Mind you, a Whitehall civil servant once took me to task, remarking that
>>> he was surprised that a "classicist" like myself should say "under the
>>> circumstances".
>>
>> I guess you're "in the middle of the circumstances", but then "circum"
>> is superfluous, so "in the middle of the stances".
>
> My Latin is admittedly weak. Even so, that "in the middle" looks wrong
> to me. I would have thought that the "circum" means "around", i.e.
> you're around the boundary of the stances, not in the middle.

Yes, "circum" means "around" --- I was interpreting the stances as
being around the speaker or reference point.

--
Nam Sibbyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla
pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: beable beable beable; respondebat
illa: doidy doidy doidy. ---plorkwort

Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>Le 14/03/2024 à 20:19, Sam Plusnet a écrit :
>>Yes.  I'm bored of this sort of thing.
>I know you said that deliberately, but Ouch! all the same.

A Web search engine found

70 I'm bored of this/that ...
62 I'm bored with this/that ...
4 I'm bored by this/that ...
1 I'm bored from this/that ...

.

ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
>70 I'm bored of this/that ...
>62 I'm bored with this/that ...
> 4 I'm bored by this/that ...
> 1 I'm bored from this/that ...

Here are quotations from TV shows (I have changed the word
"***", where the first "*" is an "s", the third an "x", and
the most frequent letter is in the middle, into "***").

I am bored with my own kids?
I'm bored with class.
I'm bored with it, that's all.
I'm bored with it.
I'm bored with my character.
I'm bored with ounces.
I'm bored with plaid.
I'm bored with ***.
I'm bored with the bar scene.
I'm bored with the games.
I'm bored with this crap.
I'm bored with this drink.
I'm bored with this old song.
I'm bored with this school, with work, with this town.
I'm bored with this topic.
I'm bored with this.
l'm bored with sitting.
I'm bored of being afraid
I'm bored of giving out
I'm bored of incompletes.
I'm bored of making other people smile.
I'm bored of me.
I'm bored of my remit.
I'm bored of pizza.
I'm bored of this forest.
I'm bored of this game.
I'm bored of this.
I'm bored of you already.
I'm bored of you now.
I'm bored by it.

.

jerryfriedman wrote:

> Hibou wrote:

>> Le 14/03/2024 à 12:51, Sn!pe a écrit :
>>> Greetings, Group.
>>>
>>> Which is correct: different from, different than or different to?
>>>
>>> I think that a thing differs from or is similar to another thing;
>>> does that hold true in this case?

>> 'Different from' is the classic form, 'different than'
>> characteristically American.

>> AmE:
>> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-US-2019&smoothing=3>

>> BrE:
>> <https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=different+to%2Cdifferent+from%2Cdifferent+than&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-GB-2019&smoothing=3>

> And"different to" is characteristically British, though I hear it in New
> Mexico as a hispanicism.

I would also consider "distinct from," with this caveat:

https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/Distinct-and-Different-What-s-the-Difference-Usage-Meaning

Best.
--
Marius Hancu

ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
>I'm bored of being afraid

|The normal constructions are with "with" or with "by": "they
|were bored with being left alone in the country"; "he became
|bored with Patrick"; "they were bored by the party political
|broadcasts before the general election."
| |A regrettable tendency has emerged in recent years, esp. in
|non-standard English in Britain and abroad, to construe the
|verb with "of".
| Burchfield 1998

ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
>|A regrettable tendency has emerged in recent years, esp. in
>|non-standard English in Britain and abroad, to construe the
>|verb with "of".
>Burchfield 1998

When I read essays by Wilde, I still often see "with" or "by":

|I was often bored to death by it

|Bored with Worthing, and still more, I have no doubt ...

|bored with each other

|Bored by the tedious and improving conversation of those who ...

|policeman bored by the absence of crime

. But now let's look at two sentences from "Grand Theft Auto".
There, the worst types of criminals are portrayed, who do not
shy away from using even such words as "..." (intentionally
omitted here) or "..." (omitted intentionally here).

|You ever get bored of your own voice?

|You getting bored of this?

On 15-Mar-24 6:42, Hibou wrote:
> Le 14/03/2024 à 20:19, Sam Plusnet a écrit :
>> On 14-Mar-24 15:03, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-14 14:34:52 +0000, jerryfriedman said:
>>>>
>>>> And "different to" is characteristically British,
>>>
>>> but generally frowned on by British teachers. When I were a lad it
>>> was very common.
>>
>> Yes.  I'm bored of this sort of thing.
>
> I know you said that deliberately, but Ouch! all the same.

Quite.
I have the impression that this form is now the default amongst young folk.
>
> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with prepositions.
> I'd've thought their correct usage would have been absorbed with the
> maternal milk, or at worst shortly after weaning.
>

--
Sam Plusnet

On 2024-03-15 02:07, Hibou wrote:
> Le 15/03/2024 à 06:42, Hibou a écrit :
>>
>> I'm puzzled by how much trouble native speakers have with
>> prepositions. I'd've thought their correct usage would have been
>> absorbed with the maternal milk, or at worst shortly after weaning.
>
> Mind you, a Whitehall civil servant once took me to task, remarking that
> he was surprised that a "classicist" like myself should say "under the
> circumstances".

I have used "given the circumstances" fairly often.

> Strong stuff - and I've never worked out whether he genuinely mistook me
> for a classicist or was being sarcastic.
>
> It was food for thought, and set me thinking. I understand modern
> practice is to use 'in' when circumstances are, shall we say, just
> loafing about in a disinterested sort of way, and 'under' when they
> start throwing their weight about and become compelling.
>

--
"Thanks, Monsieur," Tom said mercifully.

On 16/03/24 01:47, Stefan Ram wrote:
> ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
>> I'm bored of being afraid
>
> |The normal constructions are with "with" or with "by": "they
> |were bored with being left alone in the country"; "he became
> |bored with Patrick"; "they were bored by the party political
> |broadcasts before the general election."
> |
> |A regrettable tendency has emerged in recent years, esp. in
> |non-standard English in Britain and abroad, to construe the
> |verb with "of".
> |
> Burchfield 1998

Somewhere in my bookcases there is a book with the title "Bored of the
Rings".

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

Le 15/03/2024 à 23:06, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> On 16/03/24 01:47, Stefan Ram wrote:
>> ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
>>> I'm bored of being afraid
>>
>> |The normal constructions are with "with" or with "by": "they
>> |were bored with being left alone in the country"; "he became
>> |bored with Patrick"; "they were bored by the party political
>> |broadcasts before the general election."
>> |
>> |A regrettable tendency has emerged in recent years, esp. in
>> |non-standard English in Britain and abroad, to construe the
>> |verb with "of".
>> |
>> Burchfield 1998
>
> Somewhere in my bookcases there is a book with the title "Bored of the
> Rings".

'Bored of the Rings' is quite short, as I recall. It bored me and I
abandoned it, though I've read 'LotR' from end to end more than once
(though it too has its longueurs, IMHO).

'Bored of' is quite recent:
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=bored+with+this%2Cbored+by+this%2Cbored+of+this&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3>