Pedants' Paradise

[french frank]

Even in the present case, as ff pointed out earlier,

Compared with emphasises differences, compared to (as above) similarities?

Yes, I'm not sure that I agree with jettisoning the choices on the grounds that the difference between them is 'too subtle'.

[Don Petter]

I think of "with" as being side by side, so a comparison would be thought out in a reasoned manner. When I sit with someone, I like to think there's nothing antagonistic in the situation.

I agree. I don't think 'compare with' emphasises differences. It is indeterminate in outcome, which might be differences, of varying degrees, or even similarity.

That is why I suggested that EA's masses, who can't be bothered to differentiate and always use one version, should use 'with' so that at least they will never be wrong.

[vinteuil]

... as so often, Fowler comes to help -

compare, in the sense suggest or state a similarity, is regularly followed by to, not with ; in the sense examine or set forth the details of a supposed similarity or estimate its degree, it is regularly followed by with, not to. He compared me to Demosthenes means he suggested that I was comparable to him or put me in the same class; He compared me with Demosthenes means that he instituted a detailed comparison or pointed out where & how far I resembled or failed to resemble him. Accordingly, the preposition in each of the following is the one required by idiom : - Witness compared the noise to thunder ; The lecturer compared the British field-gun with the French ; The effect of a trumpet blast on the ear is comparable to that of scarlet on the eye; Shakspere is hardly comparable with Milton. Compared with, or to, him I am a bungler (this is a common type in which either sense is applicable).

[Modern English Usage, first edn.]

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

"With" is a fascinating word, which I hadn't realized before this discussion: it takes six entire pages of the OED (the big one), not counting the additions in the Supplements. The second entry states

The prevailing senses of this preposition in the earliest periods are those of opposition ("against") and of motion or rest in proximity ("towards", "alongside") which are now current only in certain traditional collocations or specific applications. These notions readily pass into figurative uses denoting various kinds of relations, among which those implying reciprocity are at first prominent. The most remarkable development in the signification of "with" consists in its having taken over in the Middle English period the chief senses properly belonging to the Old English "mid" preposition. _ These senses are mainly those denoting association, combination or union, instrumentally or means, and attendant circumstance. These are all important senses of the Old Norse word "vith", to which fact their currency and ultimate predominance in the English word are partly due.

The last statement is particularly pertinent to the "'to' vs 'with'" discussion that started us off:

The last important stage was the extension of "with" from the instrument to the agent, in which use it was current for different periods along with [sic] "of" and "through", and later with [sic] "by", which finally superseded the other three. The range of meanings in general has no doubt been enlarged by association with the Latin "cum". The interaction of senses and sense-groups has been such that the position of a particular sense in the order of development is often difficult to determine.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

You are thinking unetymologically.

When you withstand something, or fight with someone, you are usually not very well disposed towards them.

Even in the present case, as ff pointed out earlier,

I never realised when I asked someone to go out with me, how hostile I was being.

[Don Petter]

I never realised when I asked someone to go out with me, how hostile I was being.

Luckily, I've never asked an etymologist out with me.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Luckily, I've never asked an etymologist out with me.

Has anyone ever asked an etymologist to go out to them?

[gurnemanz]

I have also never really thought about this before and the etymological background of "with" became clear to me as I realised that "with" is a cognate of the German "wider" = against, as in Widerstand (resistance, withstanding). Also interesting to see how the existing "mid" (as in midwife) was gradually eclipsed in English as "with" radically changed its meaning. It lives on, of course, in modern German as "mit".

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

And the older "without" meaning of "outside". (For years I thought the hymn was referring to a green hill that didn't have a city wall.)

[Don Petter]

Has anyone ever asked an etymologist to go out to them?

You'll get a smacked wrist for dirty thoughts.

[french frank]

And the older "without" meaning of "outside". (For years I thought the hymn was referring to a green hill that didn't have a city wall.)

Or 'outwith' as they say in Scottish.

[jean]

And the older "without" meaning of "outside"...

Shouldn't that be the other way round?

[Don Petter]

Shouldn't that be the other way round?

That, or an intrusive 'of'?

(Tomorrow's subject: 'The Intrusive Of' )

[mangerton]

Or 'outwith' as they say in Scottish.

Indeed. There's also the Scottish word "furth", rarely encountered furth of Scotland.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

That, or an intrusive 'of'?

(Tomorrow's subject: 'The Intrusive Of' )

As in "off of" ...