evs.teja wrote:Marty Murray wrote:
Compared with is used when comparing two things.
In his essay, John compared the parties held by ancient Romans with parties held today.
Compare to is used to make the point that one thing is like another. Compare to essentially means the same thing as liken to.
The wild parties held at the university have been compared to those held in ancient Rome.
(The wild parties held at the university have been likened to those held in ancient Rome.)
Marty Sir,
In the sentence quoted in red colour aren't we comparing parties(two things) here as well ?
If I use "with" in the referred sentence , will the sentence be wrong ?
If no, what is the difference in meaning between the the two sentences?
Thanks
Teja
If you use
with in the referred sentence it will correctly express something different from what it currently expresses.
The wild parties held at the university have been compared to those held in ancient Rome.
means that the parties held at the university have been likened to those held in ancient Rome, as in someone has said something along the lines of "Wow, these parties are a lot like those held back in Roman times.
The wild parties held at the university have been compared with those held in ancient Rome.
means that the similarities and differences between the parties as the university and those held in ancient Rome have been considered or assessed. For instance someone may have noticed that the parties at the university are in some ways wilder than those held in Roman times while the ones held in Roman times involved crazy things that do not go on at the university.
Also, probably one would not use that second version on its own. It makes more sense that it would be part of something along the lines of the following.
The wild parties held at the university have been compared with those held in ancient Rome and have been found to be wilder than the Roman ones.
