A WORD, PLEASE: When to use compare to or compare with

Nothing compares to the joy of researching the difference between “compare to” and “compare with,” except maybe the joy of touching the exposed metal prongs of a half-plugged-in lamp or perhaps watching eight seconds of “American Idol.”

This is especially true for me. Most people who want an answer to some grammar or usage question just open a book. I don’t have that luxury. I have to open 11 books. Any fewer and I’m guaranteed to end up in hot water.

If, for example, I were to cite “Webster’s New World College Dictionary,” noting that there’s a little gray area between “compare to” and “compare with,” someone somewhere would send me an e-spanking based on whatever book he or she thinks trumps “Webster’s.” And there are plenty to choose from.

In fact, of the stack of 11 books sitting open on my dining room table as I write, eight believe there’s a very clear distinction indeed and that it can be summed up in the following excerpt from “Garner’s Modern American Usage.”

“The usual phrase is ‘compare with,’ which means ‘to place side by side, noting differences and similarities between.’ ‘Let us compare his goals with his actual accomplishments.’ ‘Compare to’ is to observe or point only to likenesses between. ‘The psychologist compared this action to Hinckely’s assassination attempt.’”

On board with this assessment (to varying degrees) are: Strunk and White’s “The Elements of Style,” the original Strunk’s “The Elements of Style,” “The Associated Press Stylebook,” “Chicago Manual of Style,” “Usage and Abusage” and the “American Heritage Dictionary,” fourth edition.

But as we thumb through them, we start to see some strange stuff. For example, the “American Heritage Dictionary” notes in its entry for “compare” that “to” is for “describing the resemblances between unlike things. ‘He compared her to a summer day.’ ‘Scientists sometimes compare the human brain to a computer.’” But “with,” this dictionary says, should be used when the speaker or writer “refers to the act of examining two like things in order to determine their similarities or differences. ‘The police compared the forged signature with the original.’”

In other words, use “with” when you want to say that different things are alike. Use “to” when you want to see say how like things are different. The logic somehow reminds me of the Homer Simpson question, “Can God microwave a burrito so hot he can’t eat it?”

Of course, other books don’t put it the same way. Author Bill Walsh, for example, in both his books “Lapsing Into a Comma” and “The Elephants of Style,” says to forget that description and instead just remember that “compare to” means “liken to.”

And still others don’t buy the either-or proposition. “Fowler’s Modern English Usage,” in its third edition, says that, yes, when likening two things, compare “usually” takes “to.” But when it comes to “with,” “Fowler’s” says, you can’t get too strict. When pointing out differences and/or similarities, “compare” can take either “with” or “to,” it says.

“Fowler’s,” unlike the others, goes so far as to lay out two exceptions to the rules.

“When a subordinate clause or phrase is introduced by the past participle form ‘compared,’ the prepositions is either ‘to’ or ‘with.’” In other words, almost any time you have the past-tense “compared,” it’s a free-for-all, according to “Fowler’s.”

“Fowler’s” final scenario applies just to British speakers and distinguishes between transitive and intransitive forms of “compare.” Remember that transitive verbs take direct objects, “I compare shoes,” and intransitive verbs take no direct objects, “Nothing can compare.”

And, according to “Fowler’s,” the intransitive version always takes “with.” And that will come in great handy if you ever hear a British speaker say, “Nothing compares to watching Yanks try to figure out ‘compare.’”