See the following two sentences.
As per my knowledge it is right.
According to my knowledge it is right.
- Are both the sentences right?
- What is the difference and use of "as per" and "according to"?
Though I would understand both in written and oral communication, I find the first to be pretty odd. I wouldn't ever use it, and strongly prefer the second, "according to".
Why is this so odd? I looked a bit in the OED at the use of "as per" (odd in itself for combining two prepositions). It was first used in 1869 as a "slang" form "as per usual" by itself. I do however come across an entry that his the a similar meaning you're looking for here: "by".
This was used as early as 1446 and as late as 1989. The difference here, I think, has been touched on: this meaning implies some obligation or requirement. No other entries seem to come close, and this matches my own mental lexicon for "per" and "as per". It just doesn't fit in this situation.
The two phrases have the same meaning but different in register.
"According to" is normal register while "as per" connotes commercial correspondence as in:
Per means according to, so you can in fact say "per our agreement, you must...". The as in your first sentence is pleonastic, and sounds affected: I'd avoid it. The very common "as per usual" is a humorous prolix.
Whether to use per or according to is the same as whether to use any archaic form in preference to common usage. In some areas (e.g. law) it's more common to see per, so you could use it to set the tone as legalese.
Both are bad English and are unnatural and incorrect uses of English as they are superfluous and add no additional or necessary information to the sentence. In general this type of mistake is common amongst Indian speakers of English. I believe, quiet ironically, that it is thought to add an air of intelligence to a statement. In fact, to a native speaker, it adds an air of pretentiousness that may serve to undermine the speaker in the eyes of the listener.
It clearly goes without saying that any statement you make is 'as per your knowledge' or 'according to your knowledge' unless stated otherwise. What else could possibly be the case.
What is the difference for example, between these statements with and without this structure...
A) "Manchester United won the Premier League in 2012"
B) "According to my knowledge, Manchester United won the Premier League in 2012" or B) "As per my knowledge, Manchester United won the Premier League in 2012"
In English we use 'according to...' to cite someone else. To cite oneself is clearly absurd, unless you are citing a paper you published, or something you have formally written. To cite your opinion or knowledge is meaningless.
We use 'as per' to refer back to something, such as 'as per our previous discussion' or 'as per the rules of the game'. Again, to use it to refer back to your knowledge appears ridiculous.
Regards and best of luck
People who want to sound important write as per. People who are important write according to.
Just to clarify...
'As per' is often used in legal discussions, for example regarding contracts. For example, "As per article 4 section 8..." and this has a different meaning to "According to article 4 section 8..."
For example if Article 4 Section 8 stated that you needed a doctors note in order to take sick leave you might say...
As per Article 4 Section 8 of our contract, I have attached a copy of my doctors note.
whereas with according to the meaning would be different.
According to Article 4 Section 8 I must supply a sick note in order to take sick leave.
I understand that per is an older and more formal version of according to, so it is very common to encounter per in some very serious and formal written language while according to has become a normal usage.
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?