This question was closed without grading. Reason: Answer found elsewhere
Jun 12, 2019 19:01
4 yrs ago
68 viewers *
English term
United States
Psychology, economics, politics
Native in: English 
Works in: Russian to English, German to English, English
as at / as of
English
Social Sciences
Finance (general)
legal
From an annual report:
As at 31 December 2018.
or
As of 31 December 2018.
I always thought these meant the same thing, but the first was BE and the second AE, but it seems that is not the case. Googling tells me that there is widespread disagreement about what these mean, but "as it" seems to be used mainly in financial reports with reference to a snapshot in time, whereas "as of" refers to things that happen from this day forward (a.k.a. "since"). But that's not how I use "as of": To me it means both a snapshot and the status of things from that snapshot going forward (which, if you think about it, means pretty much the same thing).
Is there really a difference worth bothering with here, or is it just a matter of personal preference?
If there really is a distinction, one would have to imagine a document in which both phrases are used, with slight nuances of meaning. But that would be totally weird, and I'm sure the number of people who understood the distinction would be few indeed.
The Economist style guide doesn't talk about "as at", but implies that "as of" is so ambiguous as to be best avoided. (The actual formulation is rather incomprehensible: "as of say, April 5th or April. Prefer on (or after, or since) April 5th, in
April.")
As at 31 December 2018.
or
As of 31 December 2018.
I always thought these meant the same thing, but the first was BE and the second AE, but it seems that is not the case. Googling tells me that there is widespread disagreement about what these mean, but "as it" seems to be used mainly in financial reports with reference to a snapshot in time, whereas "as of" refers to things that happen from this day forward (a.k.a. "since"). But that's not how I use "as of": To me it means both a snapshot and the status of things from that snapshot going forward (which, if you think about it, means pretty much the same thing).
Is there really a difference worth bothering with here, or is it just a matter of personal preference?
If there really is a distinction, one would have to imagine a document in which both phrases are used, with slight nuances of meaning. But that would be totally weird, and I'm sure the number of people who understood the distinction would be few indeed.
The Economist style guide doesn't talk about "as at", but implies that "as of" is so ambiguous as to be best avoided. (The actual formulation is rather incomprehensible: "as of say, April 5th or April. Prefer on (or after, or since) April 5th, in
April.")
Responses
| 4 +2 | at a certain cut-off point / from a certain point |
Tony M
|
References
| A question we had recently |
Helena Chavarria
|
Responses
+2
38 mins
at a certain cut-off point / from a certain point
That's really the way I see it, and have always seen them used when correctly! But people DO use them inaccurately and to some extent discriminately.
"The company accounts as at 31 December last" — as they were at some defined cut-off date
"As of 1st April, no parking has been allowed in front of the building" — with the sense of forward from a specified time (even though that time might be in the past)
And cf. uses like "as of now, you will refrain from using swear-words" — when used in this specific construction, the meaning is unambigous.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 20 hrs (2019-06-15 15:38:23 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Whether Prof. R.L. Task likes it or not, there are certain places where 'as of' seems to be the only fitting solution, such as 'as of now, ...' and even 'as of late...'
"The company accounts as at 31 December last" — as they were at some defined cut-off date
"As of 1st April, no parking has been allowed in front of the building" — with the sense of forward from a specified time (even though that time might be in the past)
And cf. uses like "as of now, you will refrain from using swear-words" — when used in this specific construction, the meaning is unambigous.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 days 20 hrs (2019-06-15 15:38:23 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Whether Prof. R.L. Task likes it or not, there are certain places where 'as of' seems to be the only fitting solution, such as 'as of now, ...' and even 'as of late...'
Note from asker:
| Yes, I agree with you (note added at 2 days 20 hrs). Thanks, Tony. |
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
writeaway
: good old Fr-En Kudoz. How often has this been discussed? asker doesn't translate French
27 mins
|
|
Obviously not enough for Asker to have found it when searching! :-(
|
|
| agree |
Tina Vonhof (X)
: We had this question recently.
2 days 19 hrs
|
|
Thanks, Tina! I thought we had!
|
Reference comments
23 mins
Helena Chavarria
Spain
Spain
Native in English
&
English
Works in field
Spain
Striving for excellence
Native in: English (Variant: British)
Works in: Spanish to English, Catalan to English
Reference:
A question we had recently
Note from asker:
| Thanks! I didn't see it because I searched for "as at"! I like your Haward quote there, notably "So, after all that, I suggest you follow the advice of professor of linguistics R. L. Trask: “As of – this stiff business expression is best avoided in most writing; use on, since, or from instead, as required.” Pretty much what The Economist guide says. |
Peer comments on this reference comment:
| agree |
Tony M
10 mins
|
|
Thank you, Tony :-)
|
|
| agree |
philgoddard
14 mins
|
|
Cheers, Phil :-)
|
|
| agree |
writeaway
43 mins
|
|
Thank you, writeaway :-)
|
|
| agree |
Björn Vrooman
: Here we go again =)
6 hrs
|
|
Yes! Thank you, Björn :-)
|
Discussion
In any case, I only asked because both questions were basically answered by native BE speakers only. After you mentioned the Economist, I was like: Wait, what about the AP Stylebook? But since you don't need it, I'm not going to quote from it.
Enjoy your weekend tomorrow
"I always thought these meant the same thing, but the first was BE and the second AE, but it seems that is not the case."
No, that's actually right. I once participated in a financial Q where Robin and Ted (whom you know) said as much too.
That's not to say you shouldn't avoid it if you're writing for an international audience, but it's a transatlantic issue. You see this quite clearly when you look at who answered the Q linked by Helena and who answered this one.
The Economist Style Guide is British. What you'd need (as an American) is Merriam-Webster and the AP Stylebook. Both don't use it the same way.
Best wishes
Björn