3 ms·
He's not correcting the usage of people chatting on street corners here. He's fixing bad usage in an encyclopedia. Good usage improves clarity. This is why e
by pklausler 3y ago
He's not correcting the usage of people chatting on street corners here. He's fixing bad usage in an encyclopedia.
Good usage improves clarity. This is why editors have style guides.
- crazygringo 3y agoExcept 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 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/comprise
- pklausler 3y ago"Bad usage" or not depends on one's style guide. The better ones are better.
- crazygringo 3y ago"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.