Provided that

In some cases, the "that" may be omitted. You may go out this evening provided [that] you first finish your homework.

People often substitute "providing" in the above example, but I don't believe it's correct to do so.

She has been providing him with food for the past month. (participle as part of main verb)

He provided the beer. (simple p

Dear Avangi,

thanks for the replay,

but i need an example about (providing that which equal in the meaning of (if) conditional, not (supply meaning))

I would be gratful for that.

rose73

Hi,
My position on that is, people often substitute "providing [that]" for "provided [that]" in my first example. You may do that if you like, and there is your example.

But I don't think the usage is correct.

Frankly, I had expected someone to jump in and say "I'll go with you, providing [that] you pay for my ticket" is a perfectly fine sentence. But I'm still waiting.

Hi,

I have always used "provided " as the correct form. But after researching on line, I believe both are coorect.



Kenneth G. Wilson (1923–). The Columbia Guide to Standard American English. 1993.


provided, providing (conjs.)

Many thanks, Goodman. Perhaps Mr. Wilson was bowing to popular demand. He'd be 86 now. Perhaps we could change his mind. What has he got to lose?

Hi Avangi

My gut reaction to using "providing" as a synonym for "provided" was probably about the same as yours. I'm sure I've heard people use it that way, but I wasn't sure whether it would be considered formally "correct". However, in addition to Goodman's source, I'd like to mention that the AHD lists the conjunction "providing" as meaning the same thing as "provided". The Cambridge

Thank you, Yankee. (And another one bites the dust.) Woops! That's probably not pollitically correct.

I really have to train myself to give up some of these expressions which I learned by sound as a child, never being aware of their derivation.

I've certainly lived long enough to appreciate that language is a work in progress. - A.