Comments on: Among and Amongst are different

By: elaine

elaine — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 01:41:57 +0000

Some may argue the march of the english language.

I’m with you on use over utilise.

I, however, deplore ‘addicting’ – there is a word for this already: addictive. As in, that computer game is completely addictive.

Or perhaps even more detested is turning gift into a verb (see ‘gifted’, ‘gifting’). Appropriate verb forms here are, for example, give, gave, giving, etc.

*tears out hair*

*joins language luddites/purists support group*

By: Friendly

Friendly — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:42:18 +0000

I like “utilize”, and use it often (along with “use”, obviously). It’s a little more formal, and thus I find it helpful if writing any sort of formal dialogue, such as a speech or instructional text.

Ugh! “Utilize” (or “utilise”) is *not* synonymous with “use”. “Utilize” properly means “to make something useful in a context or for a purpose other than its intended one”. My company’s engineers misuse “utilize” in “instructional text” frequently, and while the word certainly *sounds* all professional and stuff (I mean, it has *three* syllables, not just one!), that doesn’t make it any less inappropriate in a sentence like “To caulk the joint, technicians should utilize a caulking gun.”

By: Lynn Wilhelm

Lynn Wilhelm — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:34:42 +0000

I agree with your last paragraph, Greg.
Amongst just sounds right with inanimate objects. “He hid amongst the tall grass.” “We sat amongst the scattered books.”

I think among implies one of many, amongst implies surrounded by something.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 12:57:42 +0000

I was always taught that it was among trees, rocks etc and amongst friends, family etc. so different from WMDKitty. Is this another difference depending on which side of the Atlantic you were educated? And I would never use utilize! Only utilise.

By: WMDKitty

WMDKitty — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 06:33:51 +0000

I don’t know. I’m inclined towards using “among” when speaking of living beings, and “amongst” when speaking of inanimate objects. That’s how I’ve always seen it used, at least, and it just — hate to say it — “feels right” that way.

@Greg Laden — I giggle-snorfed at “among the Hmong”. You have a wonderful way with words!

By: Nemo

Nemo — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 03:09:50 +0000

Maybe “amongst” is just useful before vowel sounds, like “an”?

among many
amongst a few

By: SundogA

SundogA — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 02:28:10 +0000

I like “utilize”, and use it often (along with “use”, obviously). It’s a little more formal, and thus I find it helpful if writing any sort of formal dialogue, such as a speech or instructional text.

On “Among” and “Amongst” I’m with ambassadorfromverdammt.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:04:32 +0000

Don’t tell Bora.

By: ambassadorfromverdammt

ambassadorfromverdammt — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 19:13:05 +0000

My Webster’s Unabridged lists them:

Among; amongst: then all the roots and definitions and stuff. So no distinction there.

OTOH, it does make a distinction between use and utilize: We use iron ore to make steel, but we utilize our ore deposits to support our industry.

By: Stephanie Zvan

Stephanie Zvan — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 18:40:24 +0000

I think that, in the U.S., “amongst” and “whilst” are mostly useful for telling me who is likely to make British literary references instead of U.S. ones.