This is such a fascinating area for research. For example, is there any correlation between the spelling of
aargh and the context in which it is used? If a writer is trying to represent the utterances of a pirate, which variants are most likely to be used? I can see myself getting sucked in to a vortex of never-ending
aargh-research. Aaaaarrrrghhhh!
However, sternly confining myself to the central issue, I find that the research findings on
The Aargh Page still seem to hold up, three years after they were posted. On each of the three major search engines (Google, Yahoo and MSN),
argh is by far the most frequently used variant, followed by
aargh and
arrgh at about the same level. The same pattern is evident in the
Corpus of Contemporary American English: in written texts,
argh 28,
aargh 14,
arrgh 9.
This is actually a little surprising. Aargh seems like the "natural" way to write it. It's the variant that RM used in titling this thread, and it's the variant Oliver Steele used for the name of his Web page on the subject. I suppose we just have to put it down to people's lazy habits - not content with writing "c u" for "see you", they are sloppily dropping
As from
aargh.
As I noted in my earlier post, the three versions currently allowed in Chihuahua all have the double
A (and are the 6th, 7th and 8th words in an alphabetical listing, between
aardwolf and
aasvogel). I think the usage data warrants the addition of
argh and
arrgh.
