# Constitute or comprise? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 16, 2014, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945 "2014-01-16T06:09:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![davidmich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@davidmich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidmich)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2014, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/1 "2014-01-16T06:09:03Z")
Hi, Ae the words ‘constitute’ and ‘comprise’ equally suitable for the following sentence? > **[British and Irish Isles](https://www.thefreedictionary.com/British+and+Irish+Isles)** > > Definition, Synonyms, Translations of British and Irish Isles by The Free Dictionary “A group of islands off the northwest coast of Europe comprising Great Britain, Ireland, and adjacent smaller islands” I look forward to your feedback davidmich ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2014, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/2 "2014-01-16T06:29:10Z")
The two words have different, but complementary, meanings: Great Britain _comprises_ England, Scotland and Wales. England, Scotland and Wales together _constitute_ Great Britain. Off-hand, I can’t think of any context in which the two words would be interchangeable. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2014, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/3 "2014-01-16T13:42:03Z")
I agree with **UDS** , his example hits it on the head. “Comprise” means either (transitive verb) to include, or (intrasitive verb) to consist or be made up of. The word is often misused as its exact opposite. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2014, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/4 "2014-01-16T20:15:30Z")
Also, the word is very often (alas!) used in the form “comprised of.” “The United States is comprised of 48 continental states, and Alaska and Hawaii.” “Strictly Speaking” (I invoke the ghost of Edwin Newman) this is wrong, and “comprised of” shouldn’t be used this way – or at all. But it has become such a commonplace convention, I may be peeing against the hurricane. ---
**Author:** ![dstarfire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dstarfire/32/5762_2.png) [@dstarfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dstarfire)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/5 "2014-01-17T00:30:47Z")
Any time a grammar debate comes up I always remember this quote from H. Beam > [@](#): > > “English is the result of Norman men-at-arms attempting to pick up Saxon barmaids and is no more legitimate than any of the other results.” I think one or two dopers even have that as their sig. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/6 "2014-01-17T01:05:43Z")
You’re right (I think) “comprised of” is an outright solecism. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/7 "2014-01-17T02:45:39Z")
I am personally of the old school that says “comprise” should mean only “include” but never used as “comprised of.” The _Chicago Manual of Style_ agrees with me. However, I am apparently an old fuck because [authorities](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/comprise) on the [topic](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/comprise)say that this has been an accepted alternate use for perhaps hundreds of years. There are a handful of words that came to be used as the opposite of their original meanings. I get beaten up in [word usage threads](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=694173) for objecting. _“A descriptivist is someone who says that if enough people make the same mistake, it’s not a mistake anymore.”_ ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/8 "2014-01-17T05:28:47Z")
> [@CookingWithGas](#): > > I am personally of the old school that says “comprise” should mean only “include” . . . Comprised means a little bit more than “include”, I think; it implies a degree of comprehensiveness or completeness. You can say that Great Britain includes Wales but not, I think, that Great Britain comprises Wales; once you say “comprise” you’re going to list _all_ the components. So, "the house comprises three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a sitting room and a kitchen"is fine, but “the house comprises two bathrooms” is not (unless it’s a very unusual house!). ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/9 "2014-01-17T06:36:02Z")
**UDS** : I can’t say you’re wrong, but that isn’t quite how I understood it. I can see how “comprise” might often be used with a comprehensive or complete list of components, but I don’t believe that’s part of the definition. The word I learned to compare with “comprise” was “embrace.” So, Great Britain comprises (embraces) Scotland, England, and Wales. The statement is valid, even though it leaves out Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands and whatnot. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/10 "2014-01-17T06:58:35Z")
> [@CookingWithGas](#): > > I am personally of the old school that says “comprise” should mean only “include” but never used as “comprised of.” The _Chicago Manual of Style_ agrees with me. However, I am apparently an old fuck because [authorities](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/comprise) on the [topic](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/comprise)say that this has been an accepted alternate use for perhaps hundreds of years. I’m not at all surprised at the Merriam-Webster citation. I’m pretty sure their usage notes show wholehearted approval for every singe disputed usage. I was a bit shocked that the usually more restrained American Heritage usage pannel gave their sanction. > [@UDS](#): > > Comprised means a little bit more than “include”, I think; it implies a degree of comprehensiveness or completeness. You can say that Great Britain includes Wales but not, I think, that Great Britain comprises Wales; once you say “comprise” you’re going to list _all_ the components. > > So, "the house comprises three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a sitting room and a kitchen"is fine, but “the house comprises two bathrooms” is not (unless it’s a very unusual house!). The [American Heritage Dictionary usage note for _include_](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/include) concurs. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2014, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitute-or-comprise/678945/11 "2014-01-17T07:37:35Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > **UDS** : I can’t say you’re wrong, but that isn’t quite how I understood it. I can see how “comprise” might often be used with a comprehensive or complete list of components, but I don’t believe that’s part of the definition. > > The word I learned to compare with “comprise” was “embrace.” So, Great Britain comprises (embraces) Scotland, England, and Wales. The statement is valid, even though it leaves out Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands and whatnot. Well, not to pick nits or anything, but Northern Ireland, etc are not part of Great Britain. Great Britain is _just_ the island made up of England, Scotland and Wales, which is why I chose it for my example. I still thinkt that “comprise” introduces a list which, if not absolutely exhaustive, is at least substantially complete. “The forest comprises oaks” would not be correct of a forest which contained signifcant quantities of oak, ash, beech, larch and elm, but “the forest includes oaks” would be fine.