The first in/of (?)
Hi,
Which phrasing is proper:
"...the first in a series of..." or "...the first of a series of..." (?)
Thanks for helping me out here!
Top answer
Google Ngram Viewer is useful here. I entered "first of a series of,first in a series of" (from 1800 to 2019). Before I did that I would have said "in" was right, but "in" was near zero until the 1930s, reaching near parity with "of" around 1980 and running neck-and-neck since then.
- Google Ngram Viewer is useful here.
- I entered "first of a series of,first in a series of" (from 1800 to 2019).
- Before I did that I would have said "in" was right, but "in" was near zero until the 1930s, reaching near parity with "of" around 1980 and running neck-and-neck since then.
- I only checked because they both sounded right, perhaps in different contexts, but it turns out that "of" is the historically supported one.
- English is one slippery son-of-a-gun.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
Google Ngram Viewer is useful here. I entered "first of a series of,first in a series of" (from 1800 to 2019). Before I did that I would have said "in" was right, but "in" was near zero until the 1930s, reaching near parity with "of" around 1980 and running neck-and-neck since then. I only checked because they both sounded right, perhaps in different contexts, but it turns out that "of" is the
0
Related Questions