“to be prejudice towards/against someone” vs “to be prejudiced against/towards someone”As a “someone” usage“I am most interested in X.” vs “I am mostly interested in X.”Past participle of “let <object> <verb>”What “have gone to someone” really mean?Pony up, did I knowStep to it, to it“Twenty-four hour” or "twenty-four-hour?Which expression is correct in purpose or on purpose?More often than not, can we use it in different contexts, changing the fixed expression a bit?“for someone to” verb phrases
What to do with someone that cheated their way through university and a PhD program?
Why do games have consumables?
What term is being referred to with "reflected-sound-of-underground-spirits"?
How do I deal with a coworker that keeps asking to make small superficial changes to a report, and it is seriously triggering my anxiety?
Did the BCPL programming language support floats?
Which big number is bigger?
Difference between did and does
Read line from file and process something
Does tea made with boiling water cool faster than tea made with boiled (but still hot) water?
Re-entry to Germany after vacation using blue card
Two field separators (colon and space) in awk
Was there a shared-world project before "Thieves World"?
Can I criticise the more senior developers around me for not writing clean code?
How to stop co-workers from teasing me because I know Russian?
How to limit Drive Letters Windows assigns to new removable USB drives
How can I print the prosodic symbols in LaTeX?
Solving a quadratic equation by completing the square
Mistake in years of experience in resume?
As an international instructor, should I openly talk about my accent?
What is the most expensive material in the world that could be used to create Pun-Pun's lute?
'It addicted me, with one taste.' Can 'addict' be used transitively?
Why does nature favour the Laplacian?
Your bread will be buttered on both sides
If a planet has 3 moons, is it possible to have triple Full/New Moons at once?
“to be prejudice towards/against someone” vs “to be prejudiced against/towards someone”
As a “someone” usage“I am most interested in X.” vs “I am mostly interested in X.”Past participle of “let <object> <verb>”What “have gone to someone” really mean?Pony up, did I knowStep to it, to it“Twenty-four hour” or "twenty-four-hour?Which expression is correct in purpose or on purpose?More often than not, can we use it in different contexts, changing the fixed expression a bit?“for someone to” verb phrases
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Which one is the correct form?
He's prejudice against/towards women.
He's prejudiced towards/against women.
phrase-usage
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
add a comment |
Which one is the correct form?
He's prejudice against/towards women.
He's prejudiced towards/against women.
phrase-usage
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
Good question. This is actually a common error, even with native speakers. This may be due to how final /t/ sometimes is dropped after /s/ in less careful speech.
– trlkly
Apr 7 at 1:24
add a comment |
Which one is the correct form?
He's prejudice against/towards women.
He's prejudiced towards/against women.
phrase-usage
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
Which one is the correct form?
He's prejudice against/towards women.
He's prejudiced towards/against women.
phrase-usage
phrase-usage
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
edited Apr 6 at 16:15
Andrew
72.6k679157
72.6k679157
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
asked Apr 6 at 16:00
KaiqueKaique
2,195724
2,195724
Good question. This is actually a common error, even with native speakers. This may be due to how final /t/ sometimes is dropped after /s/ in less careful speech.
– trlkly
Apr 7 at 1:24
add a comment |
Good question. This is actually a common error, even with native speakers. This may be due to how final /t/ sometimes is dropped after /s/ in less careful speech.
– trlkly
Apr 7 at 1:24
Good question. This is actually a common error, even with native speakers. This may be due to how final /t/ sometimes is dropped after /s/ in less careful speech.
– trlkly
Apr 7 at 1:24
Good question. This is actually a common error, even with native speakers. This may be due to how final /t/ sometimes is dropped after /s/ in less careful speech.
– trlkly
Apr 7 at 1:24
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
"Prejudice" is a noun. You can't be prejudice -- instead you have a prejudice.
He has a prejudice against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Or you can say the same thing with "prejudice" as a verb, in this case expressed as a past participle adjective:
He is prejudiced against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Both are fine. There is no difference in meaning.
He has a prejudice against women
He is prejudiced against women.
Side note: Because "prejudice" is generally a negative condition, you have to be careful when using "prejudice towards" something. This usually indicates a prejudice in the direction of some negative outcome:
The judge ruled the evidence would unlawfully prejudice the jury toward convicting the defendant.
This means that when you say something like, "He is prejudiced toward women," it implies you disapprove of this attitude. If you want to make a more neutral statement, you can instead use terms like "prefer", "incline toward", or "partial to".
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
1
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
add a comment |
In the first usage "prejudice" is a noun, and in the second usage "prejudiced" is an adjective.
The usage as a descriptive noun might rarely be used at a stretch as
He's prejudice personified
but the usual use is as the adjective "prejudiced".
About the choice of against and toward, these two examples show the difference.
He's prejudiced against women.
He's friendly towards beggars.
e that is unlikely to be used by a native speaker.
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
1
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
|
show 2 more comments
Prejudice is a noun, and prejudiced is an adjective. Let's say you were to say:
He is prejudice against women.
Then you would be claiming that he, himself, is "prejudice against women", a concept or feeling or state of mind. That's a noun phrase. Being generous, we could assume you were describing him as the personification of such prejudice. That is highly unlikely to be anything you want to say.
But then there's:
He is prejudiced against women.
This is a much more sensible thing to say. In that case, prejudiced is an adjective, and against women is a complement of that adjective, as it completes the meaning of prejudiced. Actually, the against women bit is a complement in the other case as well.
Now, a quick exploration of that against/towards thing. There's an argument that prejudice is an inherently negative concept, and philosophically it might be. As a word, though, it means to pre-judge, to judge in absence of evidence based on some characteristic. There's a school of thought that says that prejudice toward(s)1 something is prejudice in that thing's favour, and prejudice against something is to that thing's detriment.
In my experience, some people have that assumption, and others don't. Personally, I see prejudice against as to the detriment, and prejudice towards as neutral. The expression for prejudice in favour would be prejudice in favour of. NGram suggests that against is used more than the other forms put together, though in favour used to be much more common than toward(s).
1: Let's not get into the toward/towards debate here, though. It's rather tangential to the question.
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
1
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f204197%2fto-be-prejudice-towards-against-someone-vs-to-be-prejudiced-against-towards-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
"Prejudice" is a noun. You can't be prejudice -- instead you have a prejudice.
He has a prejudice against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Or you can say the same thing with "prejudice" as a verb, in this case expressed as a past participle adjective:
He is prejudiced against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Both are fine. There is no difference in meaning.
He has a prejudice against women
He is prejudiced against women.
Side note: Because "prejudice" is generally a negative condition, you have to be careful when using "prejudice towards" something. This usually indicates a prejudice in the direction of some negative outcome:
The judge ruled the evidence would unlawfully prejudice the jury toward convicting the defendant.
This means that when you say something like, "He is prejudiced toward women," it implies you disapprove of this attitude. If you want to make a more neutral statement, you can instead use terms like "prefer", "incline toward", or "partial to".
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
1
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
add a comment |
"Prejudice" is a noun. You can't be prejudice -- instead you have a prejudice.
He has a prejudice against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Or you can say the same thing with "prejudice" as a verb, in this case expressed as a past participle adjective:
He is prejudiced against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Both are fine. There is no difference in meaning.
He has a prejudice against women
He is prejudiced against women.
Side note: Because "prejudice" is generally a negative condition, you have to be careful when using "prejudice towards" something. This usually indicates a prejudice in the direction of some negative outcome:
The judge ruled the evidence would unlawfully prejudice the jury toward convicting the defendant.
This means that when you say something like, "He is prejudiced toward women," it implies you disapprove of this attitude. If you want to make a more neutral statement, you can instead use terms like "prefer", "incline toward", or "partial to".
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
1
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
add a comment |
"Prejudice" is a noun. You can't be prejudice -- instead you have a prejudice.
He has a prejudice against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Or you can say the same thing with "prejudice" as a verb, in this case expressed as a past participle adjective:
He is prejudiced against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Both are fine. There is no difference in meaning.
He has a prejudice against women
He is prejudiced against women.
Side note: Because "prejudice" is generally a negative condition, you have to be careful when using "prejudice towards" something. This usually indicates a prejudice in the direction of some negative outcome:
The judge ruled the evidence would unlawfully prejudice the jury toward convicting the defendant.
This means that when you say something like, "He is prejudiced toward women," it implies you disapprove of this attitude. If you want to make a more neutral statement, you can instead use terms like "prefer", "incline toward", or "partial to".
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
"Prejudice" is a noun. You can't be prejudice -- instead you have a prejudice.
He has a prejudice against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Or you can say the same thing with "prejudice" as a verb, in this case expressed as a past participle adjective:
He is prejudiced against eating what he considers "foreign" food.
Both are fine. There is no difference in meaning.
He has a prejudice against women
He is prejudiced against women.
Side note: Because "prejudice" is generally a negative condition, you have to be careful when using "prejudice towards" something. This usually indicates a prejudice in the direction of some negative outcome:
The judge ruled the evidence would unlawfully prejudice the jury toward convicting the defendant.
This means that when you say something like, "He is prejudiced toward women," it implies you disapprove of this attitude. If you want to make a more neutral statement, you can instead use terms like "prefer", "incline toward", or "partial to".
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
edited Apr 6 at 20:13
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
answered Apr 6 at 16:19
AndrewAndrew
72.6k679157
72.6k679157
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
1
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
add a comment |
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
1
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
Or, if it's something in favour of the thing, then he has a bias for it.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 22:02
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
@JasonBassford I think of bias as similarly negative, although both can be nuanced.
– Andrew
Apr 6 at 23:34
1
1
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
The act is often negative (because nobody likes bias of any kind) but while it's awkward to say a prejudice in favour of some group, it's normal to hear a bias in favour of some group or biased toward some group.
– Jason Bassford
Apr 6 at 23:38
add a comment |
In the first usage "prejudice" is a noun, and in the second usage "prejudiced" is an adjective.
The usage as a descriptive noun might rarely be used at a stretch as
He's prejudice personified
but the usual use is as the adjective "prejudiced".
About the choice of against and toward, these two examples show the difference.
He's prejudiced against women.
He's friendly towards beggars.
e that is unlikely to be used by a native speaker.
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
1
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
|
show 2 more comments
In the first usage "prejudice" is a noun, and in the second usage "prejudiced" is an adjective.
The usage as a descriptive noun might rarely be used at a stretch as
He's prejudice personified
but the usual use is as the adjective "prejudiced".
About the choice of against and toward, these two examples show the difference.
He's prejudiced against women.
He's friendly towards beggars.
e that is unlikely to be used by a native speaker.
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
1
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
|
show 2 more comments
In the first usage "prejudice" is a noun, and in the second usage "prejudiced" is an adjective.
The usage as a descriptive noun might rarely be used at a stretch as
He's prejudice personified
but the usual use is as the adjective "prejudiced".
About the choice of against and toward, these two examples show the difference.
He's prejudiced against women.
He's friendly towards beggars.
e that is unlikely to be used by a native speaker.
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
In the first usage "prejudice" is a noun, and in the second usage "prejudiced" is an adjective.
The usage as a descriptive noun might rarely be used at a stretch as
He's prejudice personified
but the usual use is as the adjective "prejudiced".
About the choice of against and toward, these two examples show the difference.
He's prejudiced against women.
He's friendly towards beggars.
e that is unlikely to be used by a native speaker.
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
edited Apr 6 at 21:10
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
answered Apr 6 at 16:09
Weather VaneWeather Vane
5,7661720
5,7661720
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
1
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
|
show 2 more comments
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
1
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
You can't be something negative towards someone?
– Kaique
Apr 6 at 16:12
1
1
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You can be prejudiced towards someone or something, but usually it is against. "He is prejudiced towards members of his club". To put it another way, you can't be attracted against someone, or be repelled towards them.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 16:14
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
You changed it and then it became acceptable. It was not at first at all.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:35
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
"He's prejudice personified". I don't think that is a stretch at all. I think it is proper usage. My native language is English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:59
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
Oh ok — but "first" refers to the noun usage in both the question and the answer.
– Weather Vane
Apr 6 at 21:06
|
show 2 more comments
Prejudice is a noun, and prejudiced is an adjective. Let's say you were to say:
He is prejudice against women.
Then you would be claiming that he, himself, is "prejudice against women", a concept or feeling or state of mind. That's a noun phrase. Being generous, we could assume you were describing him as the personification of such prejudice. That is highly unlikely to be anything you want to say.
But then there's:
He is prejudiced against women.
This is a much more sensible thing to say. In that case, prejudiced is an adjective, and against women is a complement of that adjective, as it completes the meaning of prejudiced. Actually, the against women bit is a complement in the other case as well.
Now, a quick exploration of that against/towards thing. There's an argument that prejudice is an inherently negative concept, and philosophically it might be. As a word, though, it means to pre-judge, to judge in absence of evidence based on some characteristic. There's a school of thought that says that prejudice toward(s)1 something is prejudice in that thing's favour, and prejudice against something is to that thing's detriment.
In my experience, some people have that assumption, and others don't. Personally, I see prejudice against as to the detriment, and prejudice towards as neutral. The expression for prejudice in favour would be prejudice in favour of. NGram suggests that against is used more than the other forms put together, though in favour used to be much more common than toward(s).
1: Let's not get into the toward/towards debate here, though. It's rather tangential to the question.
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
1
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
add a comment |
Prejudice is a noun, and prejudiced is an adjective. Let's say you were to say:
He is prejudice against women.
Then you would be claiming that he, himself, is "prejudice against women", a concept or feeling or state of mind. That's a noun phrase. Being generous, we could assume you were describing him as the personification of such prejudice. That is highly unlikely to be anything you want to say.
But then there's:
He is prejudiced against women.
This is a much more sensible thing to say. In that case, prejudiced is an adjective, and against women is a complement of that adjective, as it completes the meaning of prejudiced. Actually, the against women bit is a complement in the other case as well.
Now, a quick exploration of that against/towards thing. There's an argument that prejudice is an inherently negative concept, and philosophically it might be. As a word, though, it means to pre-judge, to judge in absence of evidence based on some characteristic. There's a school of thought that says that prejudice toward(s)1 something is prejudice in that thing's favour, and prejudice against something is to that thing's detriment.
In my experience, some people have that assumption, and others don't. Personally, I see prejudice against as to the detriment, and prejudice towards as neutral. The expression for prejudice in favour would be prejudice in favour of. NGram suggests that against is used more than the other forms put together, though in favour used to be much more common than toward(s).
1: Let's not get into the toward/towards debate here, though. It's rather tangential to the question.
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
1
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
add a comment |
Prejudice is a noun, and prejudiced is an adjective. Let's say you were to say:
He is prejudice against women.
Then you would be claiming that he, himself, is "prejudice against women", a concept or feeling or state of mind. That's a noun phrase. Being generous, we could assume you were describing him as the personification of such prejudice. That is highly unlikely to be anything you want to say.
But then there's:
He is prejudiced against women.
This is a much more sensible thing to say. In that case, prejudiced is an adjective, and against women is a complement of that adjective, as it completes the meaning of prejudiced. Actually, the against women bit is a complement in the other case as well.
Now, a quick exploration of that against/towards thing. There's an argument that prejudice is an inherently negative concept, and philosophically it might be. As a word, though, it means to pre-judge, to judge in absence of evidence based on some characteristic. There's a school of thought that says that prejudice toward(s)1 something is prejudice in that thing's favour, and prejudice against something is to that thing's detriment.
In my experience, some people have that assumption, and others don't. Personally, I see prejudice against as to the detriment, and prejudice towards as neutral. The expression for prejudice in favour would be prejudice in favour of. NGram suggests that against is used more than the other forms put together, though in favour used to be much more common than toward(s).
1: Let's not get into the toward/towards debate here, though. It's rather tangential to the question.
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
Prejudice is a noun, and prejudiced is an adjective. Let's say you were to say:
He is prejudice against women.
Then you would be claiming that he, himself, is "prejudice against women", a concept or feeling or state of mind. That's a noun phrase. Being generous, we could assume you were describing him as the personification of such prejudice. That is highly unlikely to be anything you want to say.
But then there's:
He is prejudiced against women.
This is a much more sensible thing to say. In that case, prejudiced is an adjective, and against women is a complement of that adjective, as it completes the meaning of prejudiced. Actually, the against women bit is a complement in the other case as well.
Now, a quick exploration of that against/towards thing. There's an argument that prejudice is an inherently negative concept, and philosophically it might be. As a word, though, it means to pre-judge, to judge in absence of evidence based on some characteristic. There's a school of thought that says that prejudice toward(s)1 something is prejudice in that thing's favour, and prejudice against something is to that thing's detriment.
In my experience, some people have that assumption, and others don't. Personally, I see prejudice against as to the detriment, and prejudice towards as neutral. The expression for prejudice in favour would be prejudice in favour of. NGram suggests that against is used more than the other forms put together, though in favour used to be much more common than toward(s).
1: Let's not get into the toward/towards debate here, though. It's rather tangential to the question.
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
edited Apr 6 at 20:52
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
answered Apr 6 at 16:56
SamBCSamBC
19.9k2572
19.9k2572
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
1
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
add a comment |
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
1
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
Why even bother with the OP's first, incorrect sentence?? It's really unacceptable English.
– Lambie
Apr 6 at 20:43
1
1
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
@Lambie: Because it's not actually meaningless. It's just a meaning you are never likely to want to use. Explaining why that is will be more useful than just saying "don't do that".
– SamBC
Apr 6 at 20:52
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f204197%2fto-be-prejudice-towards-against-someone-vs-to-be-prejudiced-against-towards-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Good question. This is actually a common error, even with native speakers. This may be due to how final /t/ sometimes is dropped after /s/ in less careful speech.
– trlkly
Apr 7 at 1:24