Proper usuage of "manifest" or "manifested"
In our proofing sessions we are divided on the proper use of the word "manifested". Some of us hold that the following usage is perfectly acceptable:
"That underlying dynamic which manifested in the pressure cooker of 1974 is the very same one that played out in the 1990s."
Others hold that "manifested" cannot stand alone in the above context but must be accompanied by either:
"That underlying dynamic which manifested itself in the pressure cooker of 1974 is the very same one that played out in the 1990s."
"That underlying dynamic which was manifested in the pressure cooker of 1974 is the very same one that played out in the 1990s."
Which, if any, is correct? Or, are all these examples acceptable? Please explain the specific grammar rules involved.
Thanks in advance!
All but one of the online dictionaries I check listed it only as transitive verb. The one that showed an intransitive definition didn't give an example of usage, just '(intr) (of a disembodied spirit) to appear in visible form'. I've always used it in a transitive form, and I can't come up with an intransitive example.
|link comment||answered Feb 07 '13 at 19:18 Lewis Neidhardt Grammarly Fellow|
Such an interesting question! I have no special insight here but did find this interesting grammatical commentary on manifest which you might find useful food for thought: http://languagetips.wordpress.com/2010/07/08/weekly-language-usage-tips-manifest-transitive-and-intransitive-verbs-errant-erroneous-or-erring/
|link comment||answered Feb 08 '13 at 07:57 Shawn Mooney Expert|
Hero of the day
Person voted on the most answers.