2

When is it most appropriate to use "anthropomorphic" as opposed to "anthropomorphized"? Is there any difference between the two?

5
  • 2
    Compare electric and electrified. The latter form is less common overall, obviously. But it's sometimes useful if you want to call attention to the fact that something was done (causing the thing to become electric or anthropomorphic) Sep 30, 2014 at 15:01
  • 1
    Generally the -ic suffix is used with what is naturally or currently in a state, while -ized specifically applies to cases where a transformation has taken place. Hope that is clear enough. Let's know if you are still unclear.
    – Kris
    Sep 30, 2014 at 15:01
  • @FumbleFingers So that's what I think as well?
    – Kris
    Sep 30, 2014 at 15:02
  • So why am I downvoted twice?
    – mplungjan
    Sep 30, 2014 at 15:05
  • @Kris: So it would seem. Discounting electrified = agog, I think your definition (which is better than mine) exactly covers my example. Sep 30, 2014 at 15:13

1 Answer 1

3

In my opinion you can use either to describe something non-human with human traits however anthropomorphizing something is actively applying human traits to non-human entities.

So for example

Mickey Mouse, an anthropomorphic rodent that Walt Disney anthropomorphized.

Mickey Mouse, a by Walt Disney anthropomorphized rodent that became anthropomorphic.

As Fumblefinger points out, something can be anthropomorphic by itself without someone having acted upon it

Here are anthropomorphic Ginseng roots

7
  • 1
    Down voting without comments are useless for all
    – mplungjan
    Sep 30, 2014 at 15:02
  • Or Mickey, an anthropomorphized rodent that Walt Disney made anthropomorphic Sep 30, 2014 at 15:02
  • 1
    Yes, one is acted upon and the other is the state thereafter
    – mplungjan
    Sep 30, 2014 at 15:03
  • 1
    Google has many instances of "anthropomorphic root", few if any of which would refer to something "acted upon". I'd interpret the far less common "anthropomorphized root" as "acted upon". Sep 30, 2014 at 15:09
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers - I must agree with mplungjan. "One of Utrecht's most famous daughters is Nijntje, an anthropomorphic rabbit created by the illustrator Dick Bruna..." (NYT) It's used like this all over the place about the creations of Beatrix Potter, Walt Disney, and even Aesop. It's an adjective, synonymous with anthropomorphous. I don't understand your objection. Sep 30, 2014 at 15:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.