Talk:avail

Noun restricted to the negative?
Almost all examples use the negative (no avail, little avail). Is this word supposed to be used mostly this way? Should a note on this regard be made somewhere in this entry?

Alt form of avale?
May also be an alt spelling of avale. Equinox ◑ 00:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * https://oed.com/oed2/00015313 --Backinstadiums (talk) 09:03, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Transitively
Fowler reads Uncontroversial uses of the verb are common: b) the transitive use, with a personal object, is archaic-sounding, e.g. his good works availed him nothing. Some frankly marginal constructions: c) transitively with a double object: This has availed Koreans many advantages. Aren't both paragraphs contradictory? Adverb NOTHING: https://oed.com/oed2/00159943, Verb AVAIL: https://oed.com/oed2/00015313 --Backinstadiums (talk) 09:02, 23 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Are you querying whether (b) and (c) are contradictory? Perhaps on a literal reading.  But I would interpret (c) as, "transitively with a double object [other than a personal pronoun]", or something like that, to avoid overlap with (b).
 * Alternatively, perhaps you could read it as saying that class (c) is designated "marginal", within which some instances (without personal objects) are less palatable than other instances (with personal objects).
 * —DIV (1.145.20.105 12:42, 29 October 2022 (UTC))