Confusing these terms is a persistent error in legal and other writing.
Forego traditionally means “to go before; to precede in time or place.” But it’s most common in the participial forms
foregone and, less often,
foregoing.
Ex.: The outcome was a
foregone conclusion.
Ex.: In an effective brief, the discussion flows
from the
foregoing statement of facts.
Ex.: The agenda states that the secretary’s
report will
forego the board’s vote. (Rare.)
Forgo means “to do without; to pass up voluntarily; waive; renounce.”
Ex.: He will
forgo the claim to the property
if Smith settles before the trial starts.
Ex.: Don’t
forgo the opportunity to persuade
the judge on the first page of your brief.
Here’s a good way to remember the distinction: think of
fore as in
before (things in sequence), and think of
forgo‘s resemblance to
forget (a common reason that things are not done). One of the most common errors in legal and other writing is the use of
forego where
forgo is meant. For example:
- “[T]he record does not indicate the degree of counsel’s awareness or, more important, whether the decision to forego [read forgo] presentation of such evidence was premised upon strategic or tactical concerns.” Commonwealth v. Hughes, 865 A.2d 761, 814 (Pa. 2004) (forego used for forgo four times).
- “But the eye-popping purchase price offered . . . raises fears that to recoup its investment, Clipper would forego [read forgo] its subsidies and attempt to raise rents, eventually forcing out many of Starrett’s 14,000 tenants.” “Protecting Affordable Housing,” N.Y. Times, 18 Feb. 2007, § 14, at 11.
How common is the misuse? It’s so common that modern dictionaries list
forego as a variant of
forgo. In 1983, the President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine used it in the title and throughout its report “Deciding to Forego Life-Sustaining Treatment.” It wasn’t changed when the report was updated in 2006.
The opposite mistake — misusing
forgo for
forego — is less common:
- “Based on the forgoing [read foregoing] authorities, we hold that the allegations . . . state a cause of action . . . .” Garrido v. Burger King Corp., 558 So.2d 79, 83 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990).
Forewent and
forwent are the past-tense forms,
foregone and
forgone the past-participles. A
foregone conclusion is a predictable result (the conclusion “went before” the question because everyone knew the answer before the question was posed). But be careful not to use
foregone when
forgone is intended {the lawyer explained that her client had
foregone [read
forgone] settlement of the claim by refusing to respond to the creditor’s calls and e-mails}.
We hope that the foregoing discussion will help you forgo any confusion.
Sources:
Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage 371-72 (3d ed. 2011).
Eric Partridge,
Usage and Abusage 122 (1982).
R.W. Burchfield,
The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage 306 (3d ed. 1996).
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 490-91 (11th ed. 2011).
Thanks to Jeffrey R. Babbin for suggesting this topic.
Correction to LawProse Lesson #122 (
it’s vs.
its): The quotation from
United States v. Boardwalk Motor Sports, Ltd. should have been attributed to the dissent. Our apologies to Judge Jerry E. Smith, the author of the majority opinion, for this error.
