Hiding from my dissertation in a little alcove under the stairs on the bottom floor of the library, I was scanning through a book of grammar gripes. One of them was the common objection to transitive usage of the verb graduate. For instance, people will sometimes say:
(1) Now that they’ve graduated high school they can set their goals on college.
Those of an older bent will be more familiar with an intransitive usage where the graduated institution appears in an ablative* prepositional phrase:
(2) Yesterday the heir to the Notorious B.I.G. throne, young Tyanna graduated from high school at an undisclosed location.
And, you may be thinking, darn right! It’s graduated from, and it’s always been, and the kids are screwing up the language again. And it’s true that the transitive form in (1) is newer and seems to be gaining in popularity.** But it turns out that graduate from isn’t the original form, either. It used to be graduated at, as in this 1871 example:
(3) He graduated at Williams College in 1810, and studied theology with the Rev. Samuel Austin, DD, of Worcester, Mass.
So already, just going back 140 years, we’ve seen transitions from graduated at to graduated from to the plain graduated. But there’s an even more substantial change in the history of graduate. Graduating used to be something a school did to its students, not something the students did to the school. One was graduated at some school — witness this 1827 list of folks that Harvard graduated, such as:
(4) Jabez Chickering, Esq., son of Rev. Jabez Chickering, was graduated at Harvard University, in 1804; and settled in the profession of law in this town.
I’ve put together a Google Books N-grams graph illustrating the changes over time:
Interestingly, it looks like the forms in (3) and (4) were both in use throughout 19th century American English. That’s a bit surprising because the two forms assign different roles to their subjects, but it just goes to show that grammatical ambiguity is tolerable when there’s no chance of confusing the roles. (It’s always clear that the person is getting the degree, and the university issuing it.) We see was graduated at start dropping off in the second half of the 19th century, graduated at remaining strong until the early 20th century, and graduated from taking off from there.
So while I graduated high school may not yet be standard, it will be, and there’s nothing wrong with it. It just isn’t what people used to say. For whatever reason, the younger generation likes to change how graduation works. There’s no reason to fret over it; it’ll change, and life will go on, and our kids will be just as grumpy as us when their kids re-reinvent the word’s usage.
—
*: Ablative is one of a set of words describing the cases that can be marked in a language. Ablative in particular indicates motion away from something; Wikipedia has a list of these, including such fun ones as illative and inessive. (Valid only for certain definitions of “fun”.)
**: I’m a little surprised, but I don’t see any clear evidence in Google Books N-grams or the Corpus of Historical English of the transitive usage growing faster than the ablative intransitive. I suspect this is due to a strong avoidance of the transitive usage in writing, which both of these corpora are based on.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 24, 2012 at 4:01 pm
The Ridger
Ummm… wouldn’t a past progressive be “was graduating”? How can “was graduated” be anything but a passive? (she asks with some trepidation)
January 25, 2012 at 10:04 am
Gabe
Yup, that was a last-minute change yesterday morning before I was properly awake. I’ve removed it because it clearly didn’t make any sense.
January 27, 2012 at 8:57 pm
Flesh-eating Dragon
And of course, in other parts of the English-speaking world, we don’t graduate from school at all. We graduate from university but matriculate from school. Just throwing that in there.
I was just inspired to compare “has/have a PhD” with “is/am a PhD”, expecting to find that the latter is old-fashioned. My hypothesis is not supported, but there is some weird stuff going on.
http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=I+have+a+PhD%2Che+has+a+PhD%2CI+am+a+PhD%2Che+is+a+PhD&year_start=1958&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3
June 10, 2015 at 5:43 pm
A Commitment | BetaWorldProblems
[…] life update: I have graduated [from] high […]
March 9, 2016 at 6:55 pm
Kay
Languages have structure. If you can say any old thing that completely violates the structure of a language and have it accepted with a shrug of the shoulders and an announcement that soon this will become standard English, then you are yielding the right to say that anything is bad usage. A language with no recognizable form cannot be studied; it can only be memorized. And when memory fails, so what? Just make it up as you go along. Who cares if we can’t communicate with each other?
That is where “prescriptivism must die” ultimately leads. Your blog should be titled “beyond grammar”–“motivated grammar” gives entirely the wrong impression.