A Word, Please: Don’t waste time pondering ‘the reason is because’

I graduated from college not knowing what money is, how a computer works or the meaning of the word “adverb.”

Eventually, I filled in some of the gaps on my own.

Through activity best described as theft (I helped myself to an advanced economics class in a state university’s online database of recorded lectures), I learned what money is. According to economists who calculate the money supply, it’s anything — pieces of paper, magic beans, ones and zeros — that can be used for final payment of goods and services and settlement of debt.

This means that when there’s less lending and borrowing going on, there’s literally less money in the world. When money stops moving, it evaporates. This is pretty useful for anyone who might wander into a voting booth when economic measures are on the table.

An adverb, I found out long after finishing school, isn’t just one of those words that ends in ly and modifies a verb. It’s any word that answers the questions where, when or in what manner? So in “I’ll see you tomorrow,” the word “tomorrow” is an adverb because it’s answering the question: when? Adverbs can also modify whole sentences or clauses, making “unfortunately,” “therefore” and even “however” adverbs.

I still don’t know how my computer works. But I’ve been teaching myself some basics of html coding through an online tutorial. That’s something, I suppose.

Why am I airing my multidisciplinary educational shortcomings in a column that’s supposed to be about language? To show that the time and energy required to learn something — anything — are precious. So it’s a sad waste to squander them on nonsense like the mythical prohibition against the phrase “the reason is because.”

A lot of people are all too happy to tell anyone who’ll listen that “the reason is because” is an error. Why? There are two schools of thought.

The first asserts that the word “because” already suggests a reason. It’s built into the word’s meaning.

Therefore, some say, “the reason is because” is like saying “the reason is the reason.”

The other line of thinking is that “because” can’t introduce a noun clause the way “that” can. Think about the sentence: That you love me is all I need to know. What’s the main verb? It’s “is,” right? So what’s the subject of that verb? The whole clause “that you love me.” The clause is functioning as a noun. It’s able to do so because of the word “that.”

“Because” can’t do the same: Because you love me is all I need to know. “Because” just can’t work with a verb like “is” the same way.

So for both these reasons, critics say, “the reason is because” should always be replaced by “the reason is that.”

But these arguments come up short. People who say you can’t use “because” to introduce a noun clause have no problem doing just that in a sentence like “It is because I love you.” Here, “because” is working the same way it does in “the reason is because.” It’s setting up a clause that’s functioning as a noun.

And what about the idea that “the reason is because” means “the reason is the reason?” Well, it’s idiomatic and supported by many of the English language’s best writers.

“Our examination of the reasons for condemning the locution shows that they have little foundation,” write the authors of Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage. “If it is not your natural idiom, there is no reason to cultivate it. But if it is your natural idiom and you choose to continue with it, you will surely be in some very distinguished company.”

That’s why, in a world where there’s so much to learn about grammar and every other subject, anyone who teaches against “the reason is because” is wasting your time.

JUNE CASAGRANDE is the author of “The Best Punctuation Book, Period.” She can be reached at [email protected].