The essay came back with one word circled in red — irregardless — and a margin note that said, simply, “not a word.” The student opened a dictionary, found the word listed, and carried the page into class the next day. The teacher looked, shrugged, and said the dictionary listing changed nothing. They were both, in a sense, right, and that stalemate — argued in classrooms, comment sections, and newsrooms for close to a century — is what makes this pair the most fought-over usage question in English.
Regardless vs Irregardless: The Short Answer
Merriam-Webster includes “irregardless” as a nonstandard word meaning the same as “regardless” — that is, “despite everything,” “without regard.” The dictionary records it because it has been “in widespread and near-constant use since 1795,” not because it approves of it: as the editors put it, “we do not make the English language, we merely record it.” The practical takeaway is simple: write “regardless” always, and treat “irregardless” as something you may hear but should never submit.
What “Irregardless” Actually Is (the MW Entry)
Start with the dictionary fact, because it surprises people on both sides. “Irregardless” is not a typo, a joke, or a modern internet invention — it is an entry in Merriam-Webster’s dictionaries, labeled nonstandard. That label does real work: in dictionary conventions, “nonstandard” means the word exists in use but is not considered part of the standard, edited register of English. A spellchecker may wave it through; a copy editor will still strike it.
Merriam-Webster’s editors have repeatedly explained that their job is descriptive — they record the language people actually use rather than legislating which words are “allowed.” The stance drew a fresh round of the perennial argument in 2020, when a celebrity tweet objecting to the entry went viral and the dictionary’s editors replied that widespread, sustained use is exactly what earns a word a listing.
The Double-Negative Objection
The most common attack on “irregardless” goes like this: the prefix ir- usually signals negation (as in irregular, irrelevant, irresolute), so “irregardless” reads as “not regardless” — a double negative that cancels itself out and ought to mean the opposite of what speakers intend. It is a neat, logical objection, and it is why so many people are confident the word “doesn’t make sense.”
Merriam-Webster addresses this directly in its entry notes: “Many people find irregardless to be a nonsensical word, as the ir- prefix usually functions to indicate negation; however, in this case it appears to function as an intensifier.” In other words, speakers are not building a careful double negative — they are layering a prefix for emphasis, producing something closer to “regardless, and I really mean it.” English is full of words whose parts don’t add up neatly on inspection; usage, not arithmetic, decides meaning. That doesn’t make “irregardless” good style — but it does answer the “it isn’t even logical” charge fairly.
“Regardless” Done Right
Strip the controversy away and “regardless” is a sturdy, useful word: an adverb meaning “despite everything” or “without regard (for what follows).” It takes a preposition cleanly — regardless of — and it slots into sentences without calling attention to itself.
- “We leave at six, regardless of the weather.”
- “Regardless of what the reviews say, the book sold well.”
- “She finished the marathon regardless — blistered, limping, grinning.”
- “He treats every customer the same, regardless of who walks in.”
Notice the pattern: “regardless” always points past some obstacle. It is a word about momentum — the plans, the weather, the odds, and the thing happening anyway.
The 1795 Paper Trail
If “irregardless” feels like a recent corruption, the record says otherwise. The word was first included in Merriam-Webster’s Unabridged dictionary in 1934, and its earliest known citation is the Charleston City Gazette of 1795. That is more than two centuries of documented use — longer than many “proper” words have existed in their current senses.
This history is worth knowing because it deflates both extremes of the argument. The word’s defenders can point to genuine longevity; its critics can note that longevity never made it standard, either. Being old and being acceptable are different things in English, and “irregardless” is the proof: two hundred years of use, and the nonstandard label has never come off.
Formal vs Informal: The Practical Rule
Here is the honest, descriptivist position in one paragraph: “irregardless” is a real word by dictionary standards — it is listed, defined, dated, and documented — but it is labeled nonstandard, which means formal and edited English excludes it. In a job application, an essay, a published article, or any writing a stranger will judge, “irregardless” will read as an error no matter what the dictionary says. Use “regardless” there, every time.
In speech, the calculation is softer. Nobody’s neighbor, coworker, or podcast host will be confused by “irregardless,” and correcting it aloud usually costs more social capital than it saves. You will hear it in boardrooms and press conferences. The guide to follow is register, not correctness: in casual speech, let it pass unremarked; in anything written and reviewed, reach for “regardless.” This is the same register judgment that governs pairs like each vs every — where the rule is about precision rather than shame — or flout vs flaunt, where mixing the pair costs you credibility with exactly the readers you want to impress.
Quick Practice
Six sentences. In each, decide whether the underlined word is acceptable in formal writing — and if not, fix it.
- “Irregardless of the delay, the shipment arrived on time.”
- “The committee approved the plan regardless of the cost.”
- “She went ahead irregardless, which the editor flagged.”
- “Regardless to say, the results were disappointing.” (tricky — spot the different error)
- “They continued training, irregardless of the heat.”
- “Irregardless is not listed in any dictionary.” (true or false?)
Answers: 1. No — use “Regardless of the delay” in formal writing. 2. Correct as written. 3. No — “She went ahead regardless.” 4. The error is different: the idiom is “needless to say,” not “regardless to say” — replace the whole phrase. 5. No — “regardless of the heat.” 6. False — it is listed in Merriam-Webster, labeled nonstandard.
For more practice with commonly confused pairs, this batch’s sibling article on lead vs led uses the same quiz format.
Frequently Asked Questions
By dictionary standards, yes: Merriam-Webster lists it, defines it, and traces its use back to 1795. But the entry carries the label “nonstandard,” meaning it is not accepted in formal, edited English. “Real” and “acceptable in formal writing” are different verdicts, and irregardless passes only the first.
It means exactly what “regardless” means: “despite everything” or “without regard.” Merriam-Webster notes that the ir- prefix, which usually indicates negation, appears here to function as an intensifier — so the word is emphatic “regardless,” not a double negative.
Two reasons. First, the ir- prefix normally negates, so the word looks like a logical double negative. Second, dictionaries label it nonstandard, which many readers interpret as “not a word.” Both objections have dictionary answers, but neither makes the word safe for formal writing.
The earliest known citation is the Charleston City Gazette in 1795. Merriam-Webster first included it in its Unabridged dictionary in 1934, by which time it had well over a century of documented use.
Usually not. In casual speech the word is widely understood, and correcting it tends to annoy more than it teaches. Save the correction — if it ever matters — for written work you are editing, where “regardless” is always the right choice.
No. In any formal or edited writing, use “regardless.” The nonstandard label means editors, teachers, and hiring managers will read “irregardless” as an error, whatever the dictionary’s descriptive stance.
