Is for real one word or two

For real indeed has a kind of slangy/childish connotation, which I’m sure is why it was used in the title of that movie (a quick Google search reveals that the film is about a four-year-old who has a near-death experience).

However, it also does not mean the same thing as real: if something is real, it exists, while if something is for real, it is legitimate.

Merriam-Webster backs up this adjectival sense of for real (definition 3.2 and 3.3 at that link):

2: genuine «couldn’t believe the threats were for real»

3: genuinely good or capable of success «not yet sure if this team is for real»

To be fair, that dictionary also gives genuine as one definition of just plain «real», but I do think that «for real» is much more about legitimacy than «real», to the point that there is a definite difference in meaning. Consider the following examples (mine, this time):

A: I don’t think this pizza is real.

B: I don’t think this pizza is for real.

If I were looking at a plastic replica of a pizza, I could say A but not B. In contrast, if I had just been given a pizza that I was told was from a famous restaurant, but in fact looked very unappetizing, I could say B but not A.

Of course I contrived that example to demonstrate the difference in meaning. To return to your original question, Heaven is real and Heaven is for real do indeed mean pretty much the same thing. But my point was to show that real and for real are not always interchangeable.

As for the grammar part of your question, I don’t think for real is grammatically remarkable — there are other structures of the form «[Noun] is for [adjective]», e.g. This coffee is for free.

.

There are some rules for joining two different words into one, but they do not cover all cases

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY ABOUT JOINING WORDS TOGETHER

Is it correct to write bath tub, or should it be the single word bathtub? Is every day a correct spelling, or everyday? Uncertainties like this are widespread in English, even among proficient users. They are made worse by the fact that in some cases both spellings are correct, but mean different things.

Are there any guidelines for resolving such uncertainties? It seems that in some cases there are and in some there are not. I wish here to indicate some of these guidelines. They mostly involve combinations that can make either one word or two, depending on meaning or grammar.

.

ORDINARY COMPOUNDS

Ordinary compounds are the area with the fewest guidelines. They include words like coursework, which I like to write as a single word but my Microsoft Word spellchecker tells me should be two. As a linguist, I usually disregard computer advice about language (see 68. How Computers Get Grammar Wrong), but the question of why ordinary compound words give especial problems is interesting. First, these words need to be defined.

One can think of a compound as two or more words joined together. Linguists, though, like to speak of joined roots or stems rather than words, partly because the joining into a compound stops them being words (a few are not even words by themselves, e.g. horti- in horticulture).

Another problem with “joined words” is that some, such as fearless, are not considered compounds at all. The -less ending is called not a “root” but an “affix”, a meaningful word part added to a root to modify its meaning. Most affixes (some named suffixes, e.g. -less, -ness, -tion, -ly, -ing; some prefixes, e.g. -un-, in-, mis-, pre-) cannot be separate words, but a few like -less can (see 106. Word-Like Suffixes and 146. Some Important Prefix Types). Thus, words like fearless, unhappy and international are not compounds because they have fewer than two roots. Other compounds are swimsuit, homework and eavesdrop.

Suggestions for recognising a compound are not always very helpful. The frequency of words occurring together is no guide because it ignores the fact that many frequent combinations are not compounds (e.g. town hall and open air). The grammatical classes of the words and the closeness of the link between them are sometimes mentioned, but are unreliable. The age of a combination is also suggested, the claim being that compounds originate as two separate words, and gradually evolve through constant use first into hyphenated expressions (like fire-eater or speed-read – see 223. Uses of Hyphens), and eventually into compounds. However, some quite recent words are already compounds, such as bitmap in computing.

Much more useful is the way compounds are pronounced. Single English words generally contain one syllable that is pronounced more strongly than the others (see 125. Stress and Emphasis). This means compounds should have just one strong syllable, while non-compounds should have more. The rule applies fairly universally (see 243. Pronunciation Secrets, #3). For example, home is the only strong syllable in homework, but one of two in home rule. I write coursework as one word because course- is stronger than work.

The only problem with this approach is that you have to know pronunciations before you start, which is not always the case if English is not your mother tongue. The only other resort is a dictionary or spellcheck!

.

NOUNS DERIVED FROM PHRASAL VERBS

Happily, some compound words have some other helpful features. Most are words whose roots, if written as two words, are also correct but have different meaning and grammar, so that the meaning indicates the spelling or vice versa. A particularly large category of such words is illustrated by the compound noun giveaway (= “obvious clue”). If its two roots are written separately as give away, they become a “phrasal” verb – a combination of a simple English verb (give) with a small adverb (away) – meaning “unintentionally reveal” (see 244. Special Uses of GIVE, #12).

There are many other nouns that can become phrasal verbs, e.g. takeover, takeaway, makeup, cutoff, breakout, setdown, pickup, washout, login and stopover. In writing there is always a need to remember that, if the two “words” are going to act as a verb, they must be spelled separately, but if they are going to act as a noun, they must be written together.

.

OTHER CHOICES THAT DEPEND ON WORD CLASS

In the examples above, it is the choice between noun and verb uses that determines the spelling. Other grammatical choices can have this effect too. The two alternative spellings mentioned earlier, every day and everyday, are an example. The first (with ev- and day said equally strongly) acts in sentences like a noun or adverb, the second (with ev- the strongest) like an adjective. Compare: 

(a) NOUN: Every day is different.

(b) ADVERB: Dentists recommend cleaning your teeth every day.

(c) ADJECTIVE: Everyday necessities are expensive. 

In (a), every day is noun-like because it is the subject of the verb is (for details of subjects, see 12. Singular and Plural Verb Choices). In (b), the same words act like an adverb, because they give more information about a verb (cleaning) and could easily be replaced by a more familiar adverb like regularly or thoroughly (see 120. Six Things to Know about Adverbs). In (c), the single word everyday appears before a noun (necessities), giving information about it just as any adjective might (see 109. Placing an Adjective after its Noun). It is easily replaced by a more recognizable adjective like regular or daily. For more about every, see 169. “All”, “Each” and “Every”.

Another example of a noun/adverb contrast is any more (as in …cannot pay any more) versus anymore (…cannot pay anymore). In the first, any more is the object of pay and means “more than this amount”, while in the second anymore is not the object of pay (we have to understand something like money instead), and has the adverb meaning “for a longer time”.

A further adverb/adjective contrast is on board versus onboard. I once saw an aeroplane advertisement wrongly saying *available onboard – using an adjective to do an adverb job. The adverb on board is needed because it “describes” an adjective (available). The adjective form cannot be used because there is no noun to describe (see 6. Adjectives with no Noun 1). A correct adjective use would be onboard availability.

Slightly different is alright versus all right. The single word is either an adjective meaning “acceptable” or “undamaged”, as in The system is alright, or an adverb meaning “acceptably”, as in The system works alright. The two words all right, on the other hand, are only an adjective, different in meaning from the adjective alright: they mean “100% correct”. Thus, Your answers are all right means that there are no wrong answers, whereas Your answers are alright means that the answers are acceptable, without indicating how many are right.

Consider also upstairs and up stairs. The single word could be either an adjective (the upstairs room) or an adverb (go upstairs) or a noun (the upstairs). It refers essentially to “the floor above”, without necessarily implying the presence of stairs at all – one could, for example, go upstairs in a lift (see 154. Lone Prepositions after BE). The separated words, by contrast, act only like an adverb and do mean literally “by using stairs” (see 218. Tricky Word Contrasts 8, #3).

The pair may be and maybe illustrates a verb and adverb use:

(d) VERB: Food prices may be higher.

(e) ADVERB: Food prices are maybe higher.

In (e), the verb is are. The adverb maybe, which modifies its meaning, could be replaced by perhaps or possibly. Indeed, in formal writing it should be so replaced because maybe is conversational (see 108. Formal and Informal Words).

My final example is some times and sometimes, noun and adverb:

(f) NOUN: Some times are harder than others.

(g) ADVERB: Sometimes life is harder than at other times. 

Again, replacement is a useful separation strategy. The noun times, the subject of are in (f), can be replaced by a more familiar noun like days without radically altering the sentence, while the adverb sometimes in (g) corresponds to occasionally, the subject of is being the noun life.

.

USES INVOLVING “some”, “any”, “every” AND “no”

The words some, any, every and no generally do not make compounds, but can go before practically any noun to make a “noun phrase”. In a few cases, however, this trend is broken and these words must combine with the word after them to form a compound. Occasionally there is even a choice between using one word or two, depending on meaning.

The compulsory some compounds are somehow, somewhere and somewhat; the any compounds are anyhow and anywhere, while every and no make everywhere and nowhere. There is a simple observation that may help these compounds to be remembered: the part after some/any/every/no is not a noun, as is usually required, but a question word instead. The rule is thus that if a combination starting with some, any, every or no lacks a noun, a single word must be written.

The combinations that can be one word or two depending on meaning are someone, somebody, something, sometime, sometimes, anyone, anybody, anything, anyway (Americans might add anytime and anyplace), everyone, everybody, everything, everyday, no-one, nobody and nothing. The endings in these words (-one, -body, -thing, -way, -time, -place and –day) are noun-like and mean the same as question words (who? what/which? how? when? and where? – see 185. Noun Synonyms of Question Words).

Some (tentative) meaning differences associated with these alternative spellings are as follows: 

SOME TIME = “an amount of time”

Please give me some time.

SOMETIME (adj.) = “past; old; erstwhile”

I met a sometime colleague

.

SOMETHING = “an object whose exact nature is unimportant”.

SOME THING = “a nasty creature whose exact nature is unknown” (see 260. Formal Written Uses of “Thing”, #2).

Some thing was lurking in the water.

.

ANYONE/ANYBODY = “one or more people; it is unimportant who”

Anyone can come = Whoever wants to come is welcome; Choose anyone = Choose whoever you want – one or more people.

ANY ONE = “any single person/thing out of a group of possibilities”.

Any one can come = Only one person/thing (freely chosen) can come; Choose any one = Choose whoever/whichever you want, but only one.

ANY BODY = “any single body belonging to a living or dead creature”.

Any body is suitable = I will accept whatever body is available.

.

ANYTHING = “whatever (non-human) is conceivable/possible, without limit”.

Bring anything you like = There is no limit in what you can bring; Anything can happen = There is no limit on possible happenings.

ANY THING = “any single non-human entity in a set”.

Choose any thing = Freely choose one of the things in front of you.

.

EVERYONE/EVERYBODY = “all people” (see 169. “All”, “Each” and “Every” and 211.General Words for People).

Everyone/Everybody is welcome.

EVERY ONE = “all members of a previously-mentioned group of at least three things (not people)”.

Diamonds are popular. Every one sells easily.

EVERY BODY = “all individual bodies without exceptions”.

.

EVERYTHING = “all things/aspects/ideas”.

Everything is clear.

EVERY THING = “all individual objects, emphasising lack of exceptions”.

Every thing on display was a gift.

.

NO-ONE/NOBODY = “no people”

No-one/Nobody came.

NO ONE = “not a single” (+ noun)

No one answer is right.

NO BODY = “no individual body”.

.

NOTHING = “zero”.

Nothing is impossible.

NO THING = “no individual object”. 

There are other problem combinations besides those discussed here; hopefully these examples will make them easier to deal with.

What makes one word more “real” than another? Are there degrees of “realness” for words?

Totally “real”
“Real” words can be defined in a few different ways. The most obvious and restrictive definition is a word accepted as being “standard,” which means it appears in the dictionary and is recognized as valid by prescriptive grammarians—grammarians who prefer that the written word follow the rules of formal Standard English, the term used to describe the type of English that’s considered to be the norm for educated speakers. (For a good look at prescriptive vs. descriptive grammar, see this excellent entry by mendax.) This is the definition that most of us think of when we label a word as being “real.”

Sort of “real”
A second definition, more forgiving than the first, describes words that are recognized by the dictionary but considered nonstandard—words which are accepted through common, frequent usage, especially in dialects, other casual speech, and the less formal types of writing, but which aren’t considered grammatical or proper by a wider audience. Words in this category include irregardless, which is likely a combination of “irrespective” and “regardless”; ain’t; and alright, which is the nonstandard spelling of “all right.” In many cases, the nonstandard word is a portmanteau—a word created by blending the sounds and meanings of two other words. Over time, words like these might become standard by virtue of having been used so often and for so long that they’re accepted by even the most prescriptive of grammarians. Motel (motor + hotel), chortle (chuckle + snort), and smog (smoke + fog) are all portmanteaus that were once considered informal or nonstandard, but which are now accepted as standard. Similarly, trademarks and jargon from certain professions or interests can become mainstream—think jazzercise (jazz + exercise), palimony (pal + alimony), and breathalyzer (breath + analyzer).

Other words considered sort of “real” are contracted versions of longer words, like “mobile” for mobile phone or “cell” for cellular phone. These contractions can also become standard over time, as has happened with “flu” for influenza, “phone” for telephone, and even “TV” for television.

But until words in this category lose their “nonstandard” label in the dictionary, like the examples above, most grammarians would encourage you not to use them except in more casual writing and speech.

Not “real”
A third definition includes slang and words that are just being coined and used by various groups. Most people, grammarians or otherwise, would consider these words to be a level or two below nonstandard and therefore definitely not “real.” However, these words have a certain currency, thanks to their ability to proliferate rapidly via the internet and casual conversation as they’re picked up and used by more and more people. Phat, ginormous, and conversate are just a few examples of words we could consider to be “real” in the sense that they’re understood by those who use them, but they’re not “real” in the sense that they’re neither recognized by a wider audience, nor are they recognized as belonging to Standard English. It wouldn’t be appropriate to use them in an essay for school, in a resume, in an email to a work colleague, or in most other types of written communication, but you might use them in things like emails among friends or very casual blog posts.

Most slang terms and similar words enjoy a brief popularity, falling in and out of fashion very quickly (almost nobody uses “groovy” seriously anymore), so it’s probably a good idea to use them sparingly. Not only might several groups of people not understand what they mean, but they also tend to date the works they’re in. Likewise, you’ll want to avoid modern slang in fandoms set in the past—Sherlock Holmes wouldn’t take a “phat case,” and nobody in Arthur Conan Doyle’s works would describe the Hound of the Baskervilles as “ginormous.” You could always do some research and use some slang from the appropriate period to help your fics feel authentic, but be careful not to go overboard since that could backfire by confusing or annoying your readers.

Even though slang isn’t considered “real” or even “sort of real,” some of it might eventually become mainstream. Many slang terms have made the transition to “real” words over time—jazz is one that immediately comes to mind.

Really not “real”
And then there are words that are really not “real,” like the fantastic nonsense words in Lewis Carroll’s poem “Jabberwocky.” Nearly all of them are portmanteaus. In fact, Carroll’s the one who first began using the word portmanteau in the way it’s being used in this feature—the word originally meant a sort of a large suitcase, but he appropriated it to describe the words he created: slithy is a combination of “slimy” and “lithe,” mimsy comes from “miserable” and “flimsy,” and so on.

Other words that fall into this category are malapropisms, or words used incorrectly, usually in a comical way:

“Shh! Hakkai said we had to aggravate our voices in the library,” said Goku.

“That’s moderate, you stupid monkey,” Gojyo said, rolling his eyes.

The term malapropism comes from the play The Rivals by Richard Brinsley Sheridan, whose character Mrs. Malaprop loves using big words—even though she uses them incorrectly all the time (such as when she substitutes “allegory” for “alligator” in the famous line, “she’s as headstrong as an allegory on the banks of Nile”). While the words in malapropisms themselves aren’t wrong, the meanings being attributed to them are, so in a sense malapropisms can count as being really not “real.”

General nonsense words or made-up terms would also fall under this definition. Phasers in Star Trek, the vorpal blade in “Jabberwocky,” and naquadah reactors from Stargate: SG1 are just a few examples of clearly made-up words. Words like these would be obviously wrong if used in contexts other than the fandoms to which they belong.

Because they’re really not “real,” nonsense words and malapropisms should be used as features of either a narrative or character voice only.

So is this a “real” word or not?
If you’re not sure, the best way to decide if you’re using a “real” word or not is to look it up in either a dictionary or a usage guide—Dictionary.com is useful because they compile definitions from multiple sources, and they’ll often tell you if a word is used or spelled differently in American versus British English. They also label particular words or definitions as nonstandard or slang where appropriate, so you won’t have to guess. As for usage guides, any decent writing handbook should have a section on the more commonly used idioms, colloquialisms, and nonstandard words and phrases to help you decide whether you’re using a “real” word or not. (For a short list of usage guides and writing handbooks that have been reviewed by members of this community, you can go here.)

Practical application
As always, it’s up to you to decide what tone and flavor you want to give your writing. Nonstandard words are most likely to occur (and more likely to be accepted by readers) in the dialog, which is meant to reflect natural speech patterns, while the narrative portion of many stories is written paying more attention to the rules of Standard English than not—particularly if it’s a neutral third-person narration. A third-person narration that focuses on one particular character’s point of view will probably use at least some of that character’s nonstandard vocabulary. A first-person narration, though, draws entirely from the speech patterns of the character doing the narrating.

For instance, Sha Gojyo of Saiyuki, a gambler with little formal education, would be more likely to use slang and loose, informal grammar in both his speech and thoughts, while Cho Hakkai, a former schoolteacher, would stick to more proper grammar in both his dialog and narrative written from his point of view. So while Gojyo might say,

“Yeah, sorry. It was kind of a spur-of-the moment thing, leaving like that.” Gojyo shrugged, casual-like, to show he wasn’t worried about what Sanzo might say.

Hakkai’s point of view for the same incident would probably be something more like,

“My apologies, but the decision to leave had to be made quickly.” Hakkai raised his shoulder in a casual shrug, showing he wasn’t concerned about what Sanzo might say.

If you’re focusing on what sounds most authentic for your characters and your story, that particular consideration easily trumps any concern over whether you should be using “real” words or not.

Sources:
Dictionary.com
Fowler’s Modern English Usage by R. W. Burchfield
Garner’s Modern American Usage by Bryan A. Garner
“Jabberwocky” on Wikipedia
Rules for Writers, 6th ed. by Diana Hacker

A common writing error occurs when students use the wrong version of a compound word or phrase. It’s important to know the difference between everyday and every day because these expressions have very different meanings. 

Improve your writing by learning the differences between expressions that are very similar but that fill very different roles when it comes to sentence structure.

A Lot or Alot?

“A lot” is a two-word phrase meaning very much. This is an informal expression, so you shouldn’t use it “a lot” in your writing.

“Alot” is not a word, so you should never use it!

It’s a good idea to avoid this expression altogether in formal writing.

All Together or Altogether?

Altogether is an adverb meaning completely, entirely, wholly, or «considering everything.» It often modifies an adjective.

«All together» means as a group.

The meal was altogether pleasing, but I would not have served those dishes all together.

Everyday or Every Day?

The two-word expression “every day” is used as an adverb (modifies a verb like wear), to express how often something is done:

I wear a dress every day.

The word “everyday” is an adjective that means common or ordinary. It modifies a noun.

I was horrified when I realized I’d worn an everyday dress to the formal dance.

They served an everyday meal—nothing special.

Never Mind or Nevermind?

The word “nevermind” is often used in error for the two-word term “never mind.” 

The phrase “never mind” is a two-word imperative meaning “please disregard” or “pay no attention to that.” This is the version you’ll use most often in your life.

Never mind that man behind the curtain.

All Right or Alright?

“Alright” is a word that appears in dictionaries, but it is a nonstandard version of “all right” and should not be used in formal writing.

To be safe, just use the two-word version.

Is everything all right in there?

Backup or Back Up?

There are many compound words that confuse us because they sound similar to a verb phrase. In general, the verb form usually consists of two words and the similar compound word version is a noun or adjective.

Verb: Please back up your work when using a word processor.
Adjective: Make a backup copy of your work.
Noun: Did you remember to make a backup?

Makeup or Make Up?

Verb: Make up your bed before you leave the house.
Adjective: Study for your makeup exam before you leave the house.
Noun: Apply your makeup before you leave the house.

Workout or Work Out?

Verb: I need to work out more often.
Adjective: I need to wear workout clothing when I go to the gym.
Noun: That jog gave me a good workout.

Pickup or Pick Up?

Verb: Please pick up your clothes.
Adjective: Don’t use a pickup line on me!
Noun: I’m driving my pickup to the mall.

Setup or Set Up?

Verb: You’ll have to set up the chairs for the puppet show.
Adjective: Unfortunately, there is no setup manual for a puppet show.
Noun: The setup will take you all day.

Wake-Up or Wake Up?

Verb: I could not wake up this morning.
Adjective: I should have asked for a wake-up call.
Noun: The accident was a good wake-up.