In actuality, actually « Pain in the English

March 21, 2007, 8:41am

It's correct because 'actuality' is a noun. For instance, you can't say 'in actually', because actually is an entirely different part of speech. Thus, while the meaning of 'in actuality' and 'actually' might, in interpretation, have the same value or meaning to you, they aren't at all the same grammatically. I'll use an example you're probably more familiar with.

'In actuality' is the equivalent of saying 'in reality'. In fact, that's what 'actuality' means: 'in reality, in existence'. That phrase doesn't bother you, does it? They're both stressing the fact that 'this is how it really is'. Actuality becomes 'actually' the same way 'reality' becomes 'really'. It's really due to preference. 'In realty' and 'in actuality' are a more emphasized form of 'really' and 'actually'.

It's kind of like the concept of wordiness: using more words to emphasize a certain point---more than necessary---where some people might prefer to use a more brief and direct form.

'In actuality' is correct. You shouldn't let it annoy you, just change the wording in your head to 'in reality' or 'actually' if it bothers you.

9 votes Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse

AO (unregistered)

February 15, 2007, 9:54pm

It's correct but you don't have to use it if you don't like it.

3 votes Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse

AO (unregistered)

April 8, 2007, 10:18pm

I'd like to add, also, a little note on the nature of adverbs. "Actually" is a type of adverb very common in Germanic languages: [adjective] + ly. In German, the ly is lich, in Dutch it's lijk, in Old English, its lic. Basically, the ending means "like." Therefore, "actually" can be parsed "actual-like." Now, many languages lack this kind of form, so for example, in Hebrew or Arabic, many adverbial constructions can be formed by taking an adjective (actual), turning it into a noun (actuality) and then modifying it with a preposition (in actuality). As you can see, English has all the tools to do this as well (I believe the construction was introduced into English from the Romanic-speaking Normans, as it is a common way to form adverbial constructions in many Romance languages). Both (adj + ly and adj-->n + prep) are perfectly grammatical in English and, Porsche's useful observations aside, mean exactly the same thing.

1 vote Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse

porsche

March 21, 2007, 1:19pm

I might suggest that rather than eschew "in actuality", you should embrace it and avoid saying "actually". Through misuse, words like totally, basically, actually, etc. have become interjectives, nearly devoid of meaning. By comparison, "in reality", "in actuality", "as a basis", etc., have very clear and specific meanings and are less likely to be abused, misused, or misconstrued.

An interesting take on this is at:

http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~karplus/185/w99/reader...

although, it does seem to be a list of pet peeves masquerading as a reference, and some of the statements on the site are debatable.

1 vote Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse

AO (unregistered)

May 16, 2007, 6:02pm

addendum: Japanese has exactly the same kind of duality in its adverbs. Some adjectives can be made into adverbs by paradigmatic shifts in the suffix (-i adjectives dropping the -i and adding -ku, like English "-ly" adverbs) whereas other adjectives can be adverbialized through syntagmatic shifts ("noun + na" used as an adjective drops the "na" and adds "ni," a preposition meaning "in" or "by," just like the English "in + noun" adjectives).

0 vote Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse

AO (unregistered)

May 16, 2007, 6:04pm

argh sorry

English "in + noun" adverbs, not adjectives.

0 vote Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse

Isabella (unregistered)

February 18, 2007, 1:24am

I agree with AO - It's correct.

So it's now just your preference whether to use it or not.

0 vote Vote! • URL to this comment • Report Abuse