Are for the sake of and for sake of both equally correct and idiomatic?

The dictionaries I know list only the former, while the latter also seems to be commonplace.

1 Answer 1


I don't recognise "for sake of" as an English phrase.

Looking at the iWeb corpus, I see that it does occur: 1990 instances, against 120670 of "for the sake of".

It is a much less common variant, and if I it occurred in something I was editing, I would regard it as a mistake, and add the "the".

Added to the answer by Jerzy Brzóska, 1 November 2021: It's occurrence in Google Ngrams is also at least a hundred times less common than that of "for the sake of".

  • It is literally always "for sake of the argument", as a set phrase. What kind of editor does not recognize this and adds "the"? Quite a few, apparently, as there are some results for this, too, but that's just wrong by common sense. The n-gram that you linked is nonsense, by the way. The results for the the-less variant include the the in the overview, and it's well known that this interface is lying to the user.
    – vectory
    Nov 1, 2021 at 18:14
  • 1
    @vectory, I am a native English speaker who does not recognise for sake of the argument as an English phrase. I would always assume it was a mistake for for the sake of argument.
    – Colin Fine
    Nov 1, 2021 at 19:09
  • I did not link an ngram: that was inserted by Jerzy Brzóska, who should not have added it without taking VERY CLEAR AND PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY for having done so.
    – Colin Fine
    Nov 1, 2021 at 19:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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