"risen" for "raised"
bgzimmer at BABEL.LING.UPENN.EDU
Thu Feb 21 18:10:28 UTC 2008
Thanks to Arnold and Larry for their comments, which I've appended to
the Language Log post.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu> wrote:
> At 11:55 AM -0500 2/21/08, Benjamin Zimmer wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Benjamin Zimmer
> ><bgzimmer at babel.ling.upenn.edu> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:36 AM, <RonButters at aol.com> wrote:
> >> > Perhaps this is just a typo the both the author and editor missed--or a
> >> > hypercorrection--or do people really normally use "risen" as
> >>the past participle of
> >> > "raise"?
> >> >
> > > > "Campbell has risen far more in campaign contributions than his [two]
> > > > opponents combined, with a large chunk coming from builders
> >and contractors." --
> >> > Lauren Sellers, "Three with varied viewpoints want Allen's
> >>house seat," ORLANDO
> >> > SENTINEL, 2-21-08, pB3.
> >> I blame the insidious grammar checker in Microsoft Word. When I run
> >> the sentence with "raised" through the checker in MS Word 2003, it
> >> suggests replacing "raised" with "risen". So most likely it's a
> >> grammatical Cupertino [*].
> >> [*] http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/spellchecker/
> >Now on Language Log:
> It's actually subtler than your description of the facts, Ben. You
> observe in the LL post that
> It's a rather odd "incorrection" for MS Word to make. I could
> understand the grammar checker flagging "has rised," but "has raised"
> is, by and large, used in a perfectly grammatical fashion - very
> often in the exact context of the Orlando Sentinel article,
> specifiying how much money a candidate has raised.
> But in fact if the Sentinel reporter had written and spell-checked not
> "Campbell has raised far more in campaign contributions than both his
> opponents combined,
> but rather
> "Campbell has raised more campaign contributions than both his
> opponents combined."
> no incorrection to "risen" would have been suggested. It\'s not the
> "has raised" that has raised (*risen) the spell-checker's red flag
> but the "(has) raised...in...", which it took (incorrectly, but
> plausibly) to signal the presence of an intransitive "rise/risen" as
> opposed to a transitive "raise/raised". (On the model of "You've
> raised my expectations/You've risen in my expectations".) In the
> case at issue, "raise" is a transitive verb being used absolutely,
> but you'll have to admit that's a pretty subtle point for the
> spell-check to be expected to grasp.
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l