1

I used the following expression:

As far I can see, I’m godlike.

A colleague of mine opposed that statement, not on semantic grounds (he does know I'm godlike, although he'd never admit that), but rather due to grammatical inconsistency with his experience. He proposes that the only correct way to express that form is with an extra as, like so:

As far as I can see, I’m godlike.

Is he correct? (Please keep in mind that I’m godlike, hence unlikely to err.)

5
  • 2
    As near as I can figure, you've got it wrong. I've never heard it without the other as.
    – Kit Z. Fox
    Jul 17, 2014 at 14:21
  • Omitting the second as was more common 2-3 centuries ago, but relatively speaking it was always an extremely rare usage. I would say this is General Reference. Jul 17, 2014 at 14:31
  • There should be two as's, because that's the way the equative construction is constructed; only two phrases, each one marked with as at the beginning. The second as may well be dying in various Englishes world wide, but it's the norm for native speakers in the USA. Jul 17, 2014 at 14:46
  • @JohnLawler Sometime the first one is skipped in sentence-initial position in relaxed speech: Far as I can see, there ain’t nothin’ to be done here. And then there’s the It’s not so far as you’d think variant.
    – tchrist
    Jul 17, 2014 at 14:57
  • @tchrist: Right. This is true of any predictable sentence-initial material -- determiners, auxiliaries, prepositions, complementizers, pronouns, you name it -- under the rule of Conversational Deletion. Jul 17, 2014 at 15:02

1 Answer 1

3

I couldn't find the phrase without the second "as" in any legitimate source (dictionary / grammar books).

A quick Google search shows that it is also much less frequent:

  • 102,000,000 - "as far I"
  • 1,010,000,000 - "as far as I"

If you examine the context in the "as far I" results, the overall quality of English is very poor, so it would seem safe to assume it's just wrong.

11
  • 1
    A google search will not tell you if something is correct or not. It will only tell you that there at least 102,000,000 illiterates in the world.
    – fdb
    Jul 17, 2014 at 16:08
  • @fdb While agreeing with your point, I need to remark that being listed on google for something one's written, disqualifies said person from being illiterate, doesn't it? Perhaps a bad speller and less then fluent but definitely not an illiterate. Jul 17, 2014 at 16:14
  • 1
    "Illiterate" is used here - as often - in its hyperbolic sense.
    – fdb
    Jul 17, 2014 at 16:17
  • @KonradViltersten To pick nits, a written transcript of a conversation with an illiterate person can exist.
    – Jason C
    Jul 17, 2014 at 22:39
  • COCA is way better than Google for this sort of thing. Everything on it is written or spoken by native speakers.
    – Dangph
    Jul 17, 2014 at 22:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .