English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm a non-native speaker and I'm having trouble using both due to in a sentence.

I want to describe a certain thing, let's say 'A', is a result of two processes, 'B' and 'C'.

I remembered a friend of mine who is a native English speaker advising me to use 'both due to', but I can't remember exactly how.

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by RegDwigнt Jan 1 '13 at 20:01

Questions on English Language & Usage Stack Exchange are expected to relate to English language and usage within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

"'A', is a result of two processes, 'B' and 'C'." is not a suitable example case for the use of both due to. This question might be GR, but considering your earnest, I'm posting a short answer. – Kris Dec 24 '12 at 9:45
Hello and welcome. I am afraid this question may be considered too open-ended and/or too basic for this site. You might be interested in our proposed sister site for English language learners. You can support it by committing. Thank you. – RegDwigнt Dec 24 '12 at 12:34
@RegDwighт An open-ended question is one that has more than one possible definite answer. One that is too basic would be with a clear and definite answer, not open to debate. At least I thought so. :) – Kris Dec 25 '12 at 4:57

The given sentence is not a suitable example. Instead, consider:

A is a result of X    } 
and                   } -> A and B are both due to X  
B is a result of X    } 

We notice that A and B are both caused by X. Therefore, they are both due to X.

An alternate situation is where

A is a result of X    } 
and                   } -> A is both due to X as well as Y
A is a result of Y    } 

His failure is both due to his lack of preparation as well his poor health. However, this is a less preferred construction and may be considered awkward.

share|improve this answer
I'd probably rephrase the second one as "A is due to X, and A is due to Y as well." (Your sentence is not wrong per se, but I thought the first one reads much more naturally.) – J.R. Dec 24 '12 at 10:00
Surely your second example is a perfect demonstration of where due both to should be used rather than both due to. – TimLymington Dec 24 '12 at 10:02
@J.R. Yes. It was so structured as to merely illustrate the (possible) use of the phrase 'both due to' -- a hypothetical case, if you will. – Kris Dec 24 '12 at 10:02
It's not "awkward": it's merely syntactically and semantically wrong, an example of how native speakers will say anything regardless of whether it says what they mean or means what they want to say & then claim that it's correct because they're native speakers & understand what it means & expect everyone else to read their mind. – user21497 Dec 24 '12 at 10:32
The second case could be rephrased as due both to X and to Y. – Peter Shor Dec 24 '12 at 16:02

"X is due to Y" means that Y caused X. You've got it the wrong way round.
You could say "A is due to both B and C", but then that could be interpreted as either B or C on its own could result in A.
So you may be best to say something like, "A is due to a combination of B and C", to avoid ambiguity.

share|improve this answer
Due to a combination of B and C is fine, as is due to both B and C, though with a slightly different meaning. But due to a combination of both B and C is pleonastic at best, and misleading at worst. – TimLymington Dec 24 '12 at 9:41
See my comment at OP. – Kris Dec 24 '12 at 9:44
@TimLymington: Good point. I've edited out the "both". I didn't see that "combination of both" could be taken to mean some hybrid process of B and C. In that light I'm still not happy with my choice of the word "combination". – donothingsuccessfully Dec 24 '12 at 11:49

Due to is understood as caused by.

Back in the dark ages of the 1960s we were taught to distinguish between necessary and sufficient causes.

If B and C are each, independently, sufficient causes of A, this may be expressed most succinctly by

A may be due to either B or C.

The may be is not strictly necessary; but it is to my mind preferable to is in order to avoid misunderstanding.

If B and C are both necessary causes of A but neither is a sufficient cause in the absence of the other, the use with both is accurate but, again, may be misunderstood; it should be qualified with an additional phrase (here bracketed—another phrase may suit the particular context better):

A is due to both B and C [operating together].

It gets more complicated if a third cause, necessary or sufficient, is involved.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.