Comprised v. Is Comprised Of
I’ve always run into those blow-hard [tag]editors, copyeditors and proofreaders[/tag] who insisted that comprise be used in the active sense, meaning "to include."
Hence, one could write, "The program comprises dieting, exercise, and yoga." One could not write this in the passive voice, "The program is comprised of dieting, exercise, and yoga," which is the way I always used the verb.
Now,"blow-hard central" had a point in the sense that I never recognized comprise as a transitive verb that took objects, but I’m not sure they were right about not using "is comprised of."
Now to the rescue comes Common Errors in English, which has a solution–use "is composed of" instead, but that doesn’t quite, to me at least, convey the same meaning as "is comprised of."
Whatever, the blow-hards are always right. Blow-hards rule just about everywhere, don’t they? But they’re not always right!
Why do you insist on treating the word “comprise” any differently than any other verb in passive or active voice? You cannot use the same subject interchangeably for active and passive voice. The subject of a passive voice sentence is an object in an active voice sentence with the same meaning. If you would take the time to look at active and passive voice more closely, as well as the definition of “comprise,” you would see this. the word means “to encompass.” Therefore, the sentences “The world encompasses many nations” and “The world is encompassed by many nations” do not mean the same thing. The second sentence makes no sense, even though you want very much for it to make sense. But this is no different than any other verb. The object of an active voice becomes the subject in passive voice. Plain and simple. The whole comprises the parts. The parts are comprised by the whole. Active voice. Passive voice. Very simple.
Penelope, good point. The world is actually encompassed by much outer space.
From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English:
The city’s population is largely comprised of Asians and Europeans.
How about that?
Looks good to me, Jack. That’s the way I always used to construct things.
Yes, that’s correct but Penelope wrote that “be comprise of” isn’t the same as “comprise”. But it is.
You can say both:
The city’s population is comprised of Asians and Europeans.
and
The city’s population comprises Asians and Europeans.
Both sentences have the same meaning.
However, “is comprised of” is the passive voice, which is probably why many say not to use it.
Dictionaries will usually tell you that both of these forms are currently in usage. But Penelope makes a very good point in that, if both of these usages are allowed, then “comprise” is a very special word. You can’t treat the passive voice of comprise in the same way you can treat the passive voice of, say, “compose.”
I can say:
A water molecule is composed of hydrogen and oxygen atoms.
or
Hydrogen and oxygen atoms compose a water molecule.
Subject and object switch places, as is proper. But with “comprise” in its oldest usage:
A water molecule comprises hydrogen and oxygen atoms.
or
Hydrogen and oxygen atoms are comprised by a water molecule.
By allowing the alternate usage, changing the preposition reverses the relationship:
A water molecule is comprised of hydrogen and oxygen atoms.
It would appear that this last usage was just an error in usage, confusing “compose” and “comprise.” Because the usage of “comprise” is itself confused and limited by allowing the “is comprised of” usage, I advocate avoiding the latter. The latter usage cannot be put into active voice without changing the actual meaning of the word or using a different word entirely. That makes it a degenerate colloquialism that detracts from the word rather than employing it fully.
Never, ever use “comprised of”. Comprise means “to include”, so if you say, “The city’s population is largely comprised of Asians and Europeans,” you’re really saying, “The city’s population is largely included of Asians and Europeans.” What you REALLY want to say is, “The city’s population is composed of Asians and Europeans” OR “The city’s population comprises Asians and Europeans.”
composed of = made up of
comprise = include
You’re getting a little carried away here and creating nonexistent straitjackets. Comprise also means contain and compose as well as include; the three meanings are equal and not mutually exclusive. So it’s perfectly okay to use comprise in either the active or passive sense, to wit: “The state comprises six counties.” “The state is comprised of six counties.” The dictionary actually specifies that both constructions are fine.
While I feel that it is possible to say both “The city’s population is comprised of Asians and Europeans”
and “The city’s population comprises Asians and Europeans,” I have the sort of intuitive usage sense that there is a shade of difference in the meaning, whereby the sentence that omits the “of” has a higher proportion of only Asians and Europeans, with essentially no Americans, Africans or Oceanics, while (whilst ha ha ha) the “of” has a slightly higher but still small minority of other-continentals. So both sentences have the same meaning, almost. But (hee hee) I think this is a subjective, nuanced, almost silly distinction. So I omit “of” with the past tense usage, and use it in the present. Oh, how horribly illogical and non-conformist!!!!
By the way I observe your date format to be DD-MM-YYYY but I really think YYYYMMDD is MUCH cuter because it much more computer friendly. I suggest this proactive political correctness toward the future emergent intelligence on our glorious planet. Humpfff. 20100109, not 09-01-2010 !
When in doubt, the synonym test always help. Comprise and comprehend derive from the exact same Latin word, and are, in fact, synonyms.
I comprehend grammar.
I am comprehended of grammar.
The later simply doesn’t make sense, and neither does “comprised of.”
What’s interesting about Jack and Grammarblogger is that regardless of whether they’re right or wrong – and I believe they are mistaken in this – their logic is overtly flawed.
They agreed that “The city’s population is comprised of Asians and Europeans.
and
The city’s population comprises Asians and Europeans.” had the same meaning whereas they had failed to swap Subject and Object.
Man bites dog cannot be the same as Man is bitten by dog.
In any case, you wouldn’t say anything was included of, would you..
“is comprised of” has found its way into popular usage for the same reason that “between you and I” has: people wanting (and failing) to sound intelligent. So this is “between you and me”: if you are trying to sound intelligent, just say that your stupid damn whole “consists of” your stupid dumb parts or let the whole actively “comprise” the parts, no matter what your stupid dictionaries or fake news anchors say. If you are not trying to sound intelligent, why even stick your neck out for “comprise” in the first place? Just say “is made up of” or “is composed of” or whatever. Simple logic, people: Know your place.
With respect to is it “comprised” or “comprised of” there is also the matter of tense. I would like to know whether it is correct to say “The old fleet comprised of 27 ships” or “The old fleet comprised 27 ships” or “The old fleet was comprised of 27 ships”.
Agreed, Mr Mackenzie – I was hoping I wasn’t the only one to ‘feel’ that particular distinction between the two sentences. Are we right, though? How much does it matter when most of the population can’t seem to distinguish between ‘it’s’ and ‘its’?