Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 735 posts

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#631

Post by crazygringo »

pklausler wrote: post #621
crazygringo wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it's not bad usage. Even Merriam-Webster approves, it's the second definition listed, and an additional usage note validating it: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/comprise

"Bad usage" or not depends on one's style guide. The better ones are better.

"Better ones are better" is meaningless because there's no objective standard. What I think is better, you may think is worse. All we can say about style guides is, "different ones are different". They reflect the needs of each publication. And Wikipedia's style guide takes no stance in this case. Also, style is about preference, not correctness.

It may not be your personal preferred usage, but it certainly isn't bad usage if a major American dictionary approves.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#632

Post by OJFord »

SoftTalker wrote: post #592
OJFord wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand you, but it's more difficult than if you wrote correctly (according to my arseholish prescriptivist rules, if you like, yes) - you're communicating less effectively by not subscribing to the standard rules; I misread you, take longer to understand your meaning, it takes patience and begins to frustrate.

Also spoken language is looser. You can't hear the difference between "there," "their," and "they're" but your brain fills in the appropriate meaning. When you see it written though, there is a slight mental stumble as you initially parse the word as written, then understand that it's wrong, and make the appropriate mental substitution.

That's highly accent dependent।

I think I pronounce all three differently (Southern RP-ish (as in not farmer) BrE) but 'their' and 'they're' are close।

Rhotic AmE though clearly distinguishes those, and I can imagine them all sounding similar in that sort of accent।

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#633

Post by ludston »

devnullbrain wrote: post #624
ludston wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly because it makes me laugh, but also it's because it's actually gatekeeping other people's language that is excluding and antisocial. I firmly believe that we ought to accept the language that others use when the speakers intention is clear, even if they "don't speak good". The uneducated don't deserve scorn by default just because nobody rapped them across the knuckles when they used "coz" instead of "because…

Except for if someone hasn't been educated what 'ironical' means, in which case you'd like to dunk on them.

If somebody doesn't know what ironical means they are either a child, ESL or one of the lucky 10000 and therefore don't deserve any disdain?

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#634

Post by emodendroket »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #148
emodendroket wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would think it would be relatively uncontroversial to anyone who's read an older text full of "thous" and "yes" that sometimes the way English is used changes over time. That said, I think McWhorter's observation that much fulminating over language usage is sublimated classism is an astute one.

> That said, I think McWhorter's observation that much fulminating over language usage is sublimated classism is an astute one. It's fine in general, but it can't really apply here. This is some people imagining a difference that doesn't exist and then enforcing it on other people whose identities are unknown. Social class has no role to play in the process, except that this is the same behavior that, in other contex…

I don't agree. They may not be conscious of it but the target here is people who didn't have the "right" education letting them know to avoid this phrase.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#635

Post by tvararu »

denton-scratch wrote: post #214

"Comprises" means "consists of". So "comprised of" means "consists of of". It's not just that some people dislike it; it's simply wrong. Whenever I come across the word "utilize" in WP, I change it to "use" (with the edit comment "Don't utilize utilize"). Nobody's ever reverted me for that. I think there is a proper use for the verb "utilize": it means "to render useful". But usually, it's just a substitute for "use"…

The Romanian for "to use" is "a utiliza." Bilingual speakers might find "utilize" more familiar and choose it as such. The same might be true of other languages, and a possible explanation for its popularity.

In every other respect, "use" is indeed better.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#636

Post by consilient »

clove wrote: post #628
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oddly enough, in Margaret Mead's case, that seems to mean lying to the world about Samoan promiscuity to rationalize her own adultery (implying that in the "state of nature", whatever that means, it's no big deal), thus contributing in her own way to the groundwork for the disaster that was the sexual revolution.

I've never heard of this. Can you give me the TL;DR?

Coming of Age in Samoa is controversial but the claim that Mead was actively lying is pretty untenable.

The main point of contention is that some of Mead's subjects, 40 years and a conversion to Christianity later, denied having had casual sex as young women and claimed that they were playing a practical joke on her.

Whether they were telling the truth then and if so to what extent they're representative of Mead's other subjects is a thorny issue, to say the least.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#637

Post by version_five »

ezekiel68 wrote: post #414

I don't know the right solution to this problem, but I wish there were some kind of effective defense mechanism in open society against activist superminorities. Pedants tilting at windmills shouldn't be able to alter the cultural landscape this easily. I am aware that their problem and my problem are privileged "first-world problems". The seeds of the open society carry the germ of this pathology, I guess.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

The refrain of the left "what's the big deal, why do you care" is exactly the sort of lazy dismissal that makes people end up resting on their laurels and believing that "one small change" doesn't matter.

We need to get better at pushing back at the first small sign of nonsense, and not let things get really bad before people start to care. Ironically, this wikipedia edit is pretty much the most benign current example of a minority controlling a narrative because nobody cares enough to push back. See all the insane modern language policing.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#639

Post by malicka »

robocat wrote: post #547
Izkata wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because based on the words it's composed of, it's different from "left" - it would include "forward" and "backward". Similarly for "notlight" implying including twilight, which "dark" does not.

> twilight Perhaps that is lightandnotlight. We almost have notlight in English: unlit. An unlit room feels twilighty to me. > notright Left in Esperanto: maldekstra I can’t imagine why a language designer would choose “mal” as the prefix for “not”. In English and Spanish (two common languages), mal has some bad connotations (malodour, malady, malfeasance, malo, malformed). Let’s try the opposite: “not left” is defin…

> Let’s try the opposite: “not left” is definitely something different from “right” - urrrgggh. “Do not go left” doesn’t mean to go right.

“maldekstra” doesn't actually mean “not right” — mal in Esperanto more precisely means “opposite.” Left is opposite of right, and so malmaldekstra (opposite of the opposite of right) is still right (dekstra).

“Not right” in Esperanto doesn't exactly mean left, either, just like in in English. That'd be ne + dekstra = nedesktra.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#640

Post by devnullbrain »

ludston wrote: post #633
devnullbrain wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for if someone hasn't been educated what 'ironical' means, in which case you'd like to dunk on them.

If somebody doesn't know what ironical means they are either a child, ESL or one of the lucky 10000 and therefore don't deserve any disdain?

Too late to choose whether or not to be disdainful, you've already excluded them from understanding you.
Post reply on HN