Due to

Question

Dear all,

I recently posted a letter of motivation and Mountainhiker, the moderator told me to check my sentences with "due to"...
I didn't find any satisfacional answer searching the web, so hopefully you can help me with this...

" Due to different freight forwarding and custom regulations, I learned to cooperate with diffent parties and matters."

"Due to my work experience in different companies and employment with the most different personalities, I can offer my extended language skills, profound organisation skills as well as my ability to get easiliy used to new projects to my future employee."

Thank you for any advice!!!

Julia

Nona the brit · Accepted Answer

I agree with MH on this. I wouldn't say it is absolutely incorrect but I would avoid it in these circumstances.

To me, 'due to' has a negative result -for example 'due to the appalling traffic, I was late for my appointment; Due to your incompetence, we lost the order; Due to different fowarding regulations, the package went missing between the two countries' and so on.

Due to also needs a clear and direct connection between the cause and effect. You have probably learned to cooperate with different people for more reasons than just different regulations. You have these good qualities for more reasons than just moving companies.

Mister Micawber · Answer

The bone of contention lies in the fact that some still object to its use at the beginning of a sentence, considering that it should be attached to its clause:

'I learned to cooperate with different parties and matters, due to different freight forwarding and custom regulations.' This would correct the matter if the referents were appropriate-- but as you see, they are not.

It needs to be recast as 'I learned to cooperate with different parties and matters, due to my experience with different freight forwarding and custom regulations.'

And then, if you defy the purists, you can risk placing it at the beginning:

'Due to my experience with different freight forwarding and custom regulations, I learned to cooperate with different parties and matters.'

Julietta · Answer

Dear nona-the-brit and Mr. Micawber,

thank you very much for your help, I really appreciate it and will change the sentence.

Yours, Julia

MountainHiker · Answer

Hi folks,

Here is the stuff I was referencing with the Due To:

[url="http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0107.html"]http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0107.html[/url]

[url="http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxduetox.html"][/url]

[url="http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/concise.htm"][/url]

It has to do with whether "due to" functions as an adjective or an adverb. Some of the pedants see red when it is used as an adverb. But most major newspapers (Wall Street Journal), use "Due to" as an adverb when beginning a sentence. So it has become very common now.

It depends upon the audience. Most people don't care. I think I fall into that camp as well, though I do notice it.

MountainHiker

Mister Micawber · Answer

Ah! I see-- 'my ability to cooperate... is due to my experience'; 'my ability to offer my extended language skills... is due to my work experience'.

Actually, I vaguely remember that rule-- if only you guys hadn't weaned me from my Fowler & Fowler so abruptly...

MountainHiker · Answer

Mister Micawber,

This rule usually trips me up. I often don't recall the reasons or rationality or applicability, other than to note that, according to some, you can't begin a sentence with "due to." But this rule is so frequently violated by so many respected publications, I have to wonder if it is even worth paying homage to this rule at all. My only fear when writing a formal letter is that the recipient might be a part of the 0.05% of the English speaking population that actually both knows and adheres to the rule.

I was focused on helping Julia with the content of her letter and assigned her the challenge of learning about the infamous "due to" rule. When I learned she had difficulty, I thought I would pitch in my few links.

MountainHiker

MrPedantic · Answer

My understanding is that 'due to' in these examples is 'correct':

1. 'Cancellations due to the lack of a driver are all too common these days.'
2. 'The cancellation was due to the lack of a driver.'

But 'incorrect' in these:

3. 'Due to the lack of a driver, the 1105 to Waterloo has been cancelled.'
4. 'The 1105 to Waterloo has been cancelled, due to the lack of a driver.'

The reason usually given is that 'due' is not a preposition, but an adjective, and so must relate to a noun or pronoun. It can’t relate to an idea (in this case, ‘the cancellation of the 1105’) that's merely implicit in the sentence.

In sentences #3 and #4, for instance, 'due' is properly in apposition to 'the 1105' ('the 1105 [that is] due to the lack of a driver').

It's similar to the argument against 'dangling participles'.

That said, it seems to me that the same objection could be made to 'owing to', which is often recommended as a replacement:

5. 'Owing to the lack of a driver, the 1105 to Waterloo has been cancelled' (i.e. 'the 1105 is owing to the lack of a driver').

Which leaves us with the option of replacing every dangling 'due to' and 'owing to' with 'because of'. Not an attractive proposition/preposition.

But if money or a job depended on my letter, I would probably combine a little of NtB's reasoning with a little of MH's:

a) in BrE at least, the misplaced 'due to' is most commonly met with in the curious dialect of station announcers, and so may have unpleasant associations for the reader;

b) the 99.5% who are blithely unaware of the problem won't take exception if your grammar is 'correct'; whereas the 0.5% who are pedants will if it's not.

MrP

PS: I'm not sure why Mark Israel in link#2 describes the disputed 'due to' as an adverb; it seems to be acting like a compound preposition. (But then, a prepositional phrase can behave adverbially.)
PPS: Using 'as a result of (my experience, etc)' would avoid the problem, in Julietta's context.

Due to

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions