Mistreat/maltreat
What is the difference between 'mistreat' and 'maltreat'?
Can both be used when speaking of animals?
And do both or any of them imply a deliberate action, and could both or any of them be used when speaking of a natural catastrophe such as the bushfires?
For example, are both these sentences correct:
a) "Millions of animals have been severely MISTREATED by the bushfires."
b) Millions of animals have been severely MALTREATED by the bushfires."
Top answer
They are, for all intents and purposes, identical in meaning. 'Maltreat' is very much more popular in older literature, but 'mistreat' is much more common nowadays. They imply a deliberate act by a person to harm another living creature, so I think you're stretching the meaning to say that the bush fires have mis/maltreated the animal.
- They are, for all intents and purposes, identical in meaning.
- 'Maltreat' is very much more popular in older literature, but 'mistreat' is much more common nowadays.
- They imply a deliberate act by a person to harm another living creature, so I think you're stretching the meaning to say that the bush fires have mis/maltreated the animal.
- I wouldn't use it.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
They are, for all intents and purposes, identical in meaning. 'Maltreat' is very much more popular in older literature, but 'mistreat' is much more common nowadays.
They imply a deliberate act by a person to harm another living creature, so I think you're stretching the meaning to say that the bush fires have mis/maltreated the animal. I wouldn't use it.
0
Related Questions