Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
I had learned that the word "comprise" is a transitive verb that indicates its objects are parts of its subject; e.g., a caprese comprises mozzarella, tomatoes, and basil (with a little olive oil, salt, and black pepper). Bryan Garner, who is very conservative in his grammar, approves of that particular use only. I agree. However, I, a person in the same general field as Mr. Garner, have seen such misuse (or so I would call it) of the word "comprise" by ostensibly learned persons that I'm impelled to wonder if the word "comprise" is making a shift in meaning. Dictionaries are beginning to make the improper usages of "comprise" merely *alternative* uses, for which I believe our language would be the poorer. I believe "comprised of" is universally disclaimed as illegitimate in usage guides, though I have seen that usage in numerous court opinions -- and, presumably, judges, particularly federal court judges, are among the most intelligent language users in our society (I must note that I have never seen such improper usage in any of Mr. Justice Scalia's opinions, and that man is one of the most brilliant writers in our American-English-using society, which is likely why he an Mr. Garner make such spectacular partners). However, I also see the only-slightly-less-egregious use of "comprise" as a transitive between parts for the whole; or, more often, for one part of something "comprising" a whole.
Anyway, is it strange for me to cling to this traditional usage when most people seem to have abandoned it, and the word that mis-users actually mean -- "compose" -- conveys the same meaning? And how much of the English-speaking population actually appreciates the difference between "compose" and "comprise" -- i.e., the opposition of each word's subject-object relationship? Since language is entirely about understanding communicative gestures from one person to another, and the broad application of that dynamic, what happens if most people accept "comprise" as an exact synonym for "compose"?
I worked in the patent office for six months and that was the only time I ever heard of "comprise" being used in this way. (E.g., "A caprese comprises mozzarella, tomatoes, and basil.") And patents have some of the sloppiest writing I've ever seen. The way I have always seen the word used and the way that I have always used it myself is in the form "[complete list of parts] comprise [whole]". For example, "Mozzarella, tomatoes, and basil do not comprise a caprese but they do when combined with a little olive oil, salt, and black pepper."
One answer is here ww.merriam-webster.com…
The problem that I have is at the end of the piece
you may be subject to criticism for doing so, and you may want to choose a safer synonym such as compose or make up.
Why be afraid of criticism. Why chose a safer synonym. If it is not wrong, use it.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)