By in large?

[nq:1]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online letter to the editor today. "By and large" is the way I've always written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
I'd hope it's fairly rare, on the whole.

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

"Maria Conlon" (Email Removed) wrote on 02 Jan 2004:
[nq:1]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online letter to the editor today. "By and large" is the way I've always written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
It's merely an indication that the ignorant are less fearful of outing themselves in America's social crazy quilt of inclusiveness and diversity. Such linguisti

[nq:1]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online letter to the editor today. "By and large" is the way I've always written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common? Maria Conlon[/nq]
Very ...
Cheers, Sage

[nq:1]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online letter to the editor today. "By and large" is the way I've always written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
Common as muck.
I'm sure you know, as do the Hornblower / Ramage / Aubrey freaks that we're dealing with a nautical term from C17 meaning to sail with the wind near the beam. Whereas 'full and by' is sailing close

Franke:
[nq:1]It's merely an indication that the ignorant are less fearful of outing themselves in America's social crazy quilt of inclusiveness and diversity.[/nq]
And here I thought Franke LIKED diversity! Hypocrite! So, dissing "ignorant" people is OK but criticising Asian racists is not? Maybe in Franke's world of make-believe.
[nq:1]Such linguistic luddites normally harmless alone

[nq:1]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online letter to the editor today. "By and large" is the way I've always written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
Far too common, judging by a quick Google. I found half a dozen on Google News too, and emailed the papers concerned.
Adrian

[nq:2]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online ... written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
[nq:1]Far too common, judging by a quick Google. I found half a dozen on Google News too, and emailed the papers concerned.[/nq]
If I'd thought you weren't streaks ahead, I'd have had another thing coming.

Mike.

[nq:2]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online ... written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
[nq:1]I'd hope it's fairly rare, on the whole.[/nq]
You mean "in the hole", Shirley?
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm

[nq:2]I saw the phrase "by in large" in an online ... written, said, and heard it. Is this "in" version common?[/nq]
[nq:1]It's merely an indication that the ignorant are less fearful of outing themselves in America's social crazy quilt of inclusiveness and diversity. Such linguistic luddites normally harmless alone and in pairs, but when they gather together in crowds, they can be pernicious.

(Email Removed) (Steve Hayes) wrote on 02 Jan 2004:
[nq:1]It's a sign of the social influence of electronic comunications, which enable people who use such terms and phrases to ... friends may have seen it in letters, but it would not have reached a wider public. Electronic comunications changed that.[/nq]
Agreed. And to paraphrase the American Council on Reading, "It doesn't matter what t