Unfortunately, many writers do accept dictionaries as gospel and M-W is, of course, the most widely relied on. M-W editors, rather than contributing to the maintenance of the distinctions English offers us, take any published error as a legitimate language change and incorporate it into their collection. ‘Tis a pity they cannot rely on the best English writers and publishers for their vocabulary.

I think M-W takes populism too far and the confusion of ‘hone’ and ‘home’, ‘comprise’ and ‘consist’, and many, many others only weaken the language and, hence, our ability to express ourselves clearly. Unfortunately, other dictionary editors usually follow their lead.

I still make this distinction and all others that are maintained by speakers of English in places other than the US. I have written on several others in the essays stored in “Dr. Goodword’s Office” (http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/).

She is really quite a good writer and makes few mistakes. Her reply was that if it was in a dictionary, then it was fair game. But what about, for lack of a better term, “class” differences. There are “accepted” usages that will instantly label one as literary trailer-trash* (A fool and their money are soon parted), and “hone in on” is one of them.

I’m glad I stumbled on your site and will visit it often. I also rely on Paul Bryans’ site: http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

*Yes, I have lived in a trailer park.