Lois & Clark Forums Forums General Discussion Off Topic Me & Strunk & White are Happy Campers

I just got back home and noticed something about the two page response to Finding Lois Lane (BTW, great job Paul!)

This board says "This topic comprises 2 pages".

It's right! I don't know if I should credit you wonderful people or UBB for fixing it but I was crazy with reading "is comprised of" on Zoom's board.

Anyone who's had their grammar schooled into them by nuns and ex-nuns will tell you it's always the whole comprises the parts and the parts compose the whole

Never never never never can it be "comprised of"!!!

What can I say, these little things make me very happy after a long day and a bad head cold.

Sherry

LOL, Sherry, I remember you complaining about this <g> I don't think we can take credit for fixing the grammar, but for your sake I'm delighted that *someone* has fixed it

PJ

I volunteered to post this for a friend last night because she hasn't signed up for the new boards.

"Sherry said:

Quote

"Anyone who's had their grammar schooled into them by nuns and ex-nuns will tell you it's always the whole comprises the parts and the parts compose the whole
Never never never never can it be "comprised of"!!!"

Well, as someone who was schooled in grammar by nuns and has taught side by side with nuns and brothers for 25 years, I must take exception to this comment. It was once true that comprise and compose were used in the way Sherry has said.

But language is a living thing, and it evolves continually. This is one rule that has changed in the United States in the past thirty years.


According to the most recent edition of the American Heritage Dictionary: "Usage Note: The traditional rule states that the whole comprises the parts and the parts compose the whole. In strict usage: The Union comprises 50 states.
Fifty states compose (or constitute or make up) the Union. Even though careful writers often maintain this distinction, comprise is increasingly used in place of compose, especially in the passive: The Union is comprised of 50 states. Our surveys show that opposition to this usage is abating. In the 1960s, 53 percent of the Usage Panel found this usage unacceptable; in 1996, only 35 percent objected."

Of course, that does bring up the debate of how often one should use passive voice. <G> So it's fine to say "is comprised of...." the thing is -- "is comprised of" was always usable. It's passive voice construction. "A comprises B" = "B is comprised of A." Always was that way.


As it happens, <bg> I agree with her. And having been forced to learn tons of grammar as part of a major, between you, me, and my grammar book, she's right.

Laura

hey sherrey. thanks for the compliment. i'm glad you liked the story.

i'm also glad the grammar glitch was fixed. someone must have written to infopop (the nice people who make the UBB software).

sorry to hear you were sick. i'm glad the small change made you feel at least somewhat better. hopefully by now you're well again.

one question, though...

would this be a bad time to point out that the topic should have been "strunk, white, and i..." or "strunk and white and i..."?

Paul

And here I thought I was the only person irritated by this. <G> Glad to know I wasn't alone. Compose/comprise is just one of those basic grammar things that I think everyone should know.

It's kind of you to post for your friend, Laura, and you're both right in that there are many grammar rules which are disputed and equally some which are changing over time - such as the split infinitive, now considered acceptable even by the Oxford English Dictionary!

Did you accidentally forget to copy your friend's name along with her comments? It would be nice to know with whom we're debating; it's kind of awkward to say 'Hi, friend of Laura, thanks for your thoughts and this is what I'd like to say in return.'


Wendy

Laura,

The use by me of Strunk & White as the authoritative text should tell you and your friend that I'm a product of my generation!!!!

Paul.....I know. What I don't know is how to get an emoticon into a title....

Sherry

You all know me. Having been given a heads-up on this topic, I couldn't rest until I found a definitive answer. And the answer is: There is no definitive answer. Pick your grammar book and pick your answer. I must admit, though, that I've never been a big fan of Strunk and White (even though I'm old too, Sherry). I've always felt that it leaned way too far toward journalistic style rules, which while not a problem for journalists, are not always what are considered the best style for fiction or academic writing. Just for the record, I searched the online version of S & W for "comprise/compose" and couldn't find it at all. I don't own a copy of the print version and couldn't find a copy at my local bookstore; perhaps it's in there.

Personally, I tend to lean toward the belief that languages evolve; and that the rules change over time. I also tend to trust the English department at Columbia University. This is
what they have to say:

(Kenneth G. Wilson (1923–). The Columbia Guide to Standard American English. 1993.)

"comprise, compose, consist, constitute, include (vv.)

Of these, comprise offers the only truly vexed usage issue: commentators have strongly objected to both the X is comprised of Y and Z and Y and Z comprise X constructions, insisting that only X comprises Y and Z is acceptable. The active voice use, as in Many items comprise a single whole, and the passive, as in This list is comprised of sixty items or These dishes are comprised of many ingredients, are thoroughly established in Standard English, but there are still some party lines drawn about their acceptability. Best advice: if using comprise makes you nervous and unsure, why not use one of the synonyms—constitute or compose for the active use (which receives the most criticism) and include(s) or consist(s) of for the passive? The truth is that no matter how you use this word, someone can almost always be found to object. None of the many neat schemes purporting to describe its correct use seems accurately to describe the way Standard English users actually employ comprise."

I especially like the line: "The truth is that no matter how you use this word, someone can almost always be found to object." Truer words were never spoken.

Schoolmarm

Hah. That's what I've said all along We've had some fascinating debates about lots of different points of grammar over the years, and it always seems to come down to which book you prefer. My usual caveat is that having picked one, you need to stay consistent with it, but that really doesn't apply here...

PJ
who is glad there are FOLCs who know more about grammar than she does