For many years, “one of the few” has been an accepted and harmless idiom, as in “one of the few hitters who batted .300 over several seasons.” But recently this expression has been partially supplanted by “one of the only”, meaning, apparently, one of the few.

There’s something wrong with “one of the only.” ‘Only’ means ‘one-ly’: the only one; singular; unique. Could something be just one of a group of one that’s more than one?

I think what’s happened is that “one of the few” met up with “the one and only” and gave birth to a bastard child called “one of the only.”

However it came about, “one of the only” is an illogical and illiterate expression, and shows whoever utters it to be thoroughly confused or, in the case of the Washington Post, thoroughly unedited:

[re incoming member of Congress Allen West:] “His ‘high and tight’ hairstyle will be one of the only buzz cuts in Congress.” (Krissah Thompson, Washington Post, 24 November 2010, page A1)

<END>