Skip to main content

Different . . .

Is Microsoft different from Apple, or different than Apple? Well, if we want to be pedantically and prescriptively correct (i.e., what the dictionaries and usage guides tend to tell us*), then we should only ever use the collocation "different from." In centuries of practice, however, this is one of those usages that people routinely disregard outside of the privileged circle of people who know the "rules," the way it "ought" to be.

I do say different from myself, simply because I know the logic behind it and I've been educated that way. But if you say different than, I won't protest.

What made me think of this recently, however, is a collocation that I had never heard: different with. Now, you could have those two words together, as in this sentence: Life is different with a spouse. But in that example with begins a prepositional phrase and does not form a comparative phrase with the word different.

What I heard recently was the latter. I don't remember the exact sentence, but it would have sounded like the first sentence of this post with the word with: Microsoft is different with Apple.

And the speaker said it twice, making me wonder if it was his normal collocation. Has anyone else ever heard different with? Or maybe I just heard wrong.

*Some say that in practice from usually introduces a phrase and than usually introduces a clause. I'm not sure about that.


Popular posts from this blog


Read this in English.





今週初めて黒澤明の『隠し砦の三悪人』という映画を見ました。この三悪人とは、だれですか? 三船敏郎が演じる真壁六郎太(まかべろくたろう)と二人の百姓です。この3人の登場人物の関係はとても面白くて、全ての人間の弱さも愛される性質も示します。


Movie Review: A Better Life - Part 2

This is the second part of a two-part review of A Better Life. The first part dealt more with the background issue of illegal immigration, whereas this part focuses more on the movie itself.

In the movie, neither the undocumented immigrants (representative of all the undocumented, but particularly those with upright motives) nor the police (representative of the legal system, including courts, prisons, and immigration) is entirely at fault. Both are stuck in an imperfect, human system.

The viewer is led to sympathize with the undocumented man, an honest landscaper who wants nothing but to work hard so that his one son can have a better life. He’s away from home; his wife left him when his son was little; he has next to nothing; when he does acquire something (a lawn business and pickup with equipment) it gets stolen from him. And yet, the movie does not excuse what he does wrong nor does it try to show him as a man victimized and ruined by the consequences of his actions.

Apart fr…