You said "deep seeded" again.
What a hoser! Ha ha ha!
You would not be invited on our trivia team because you are one of those fake intellectuals who tries to impress with phrases like "deep seeded". We laugh at your types in public.
According to a Jan. 19 Fox News
story from Houston about how "[a]n application form to join a parochial schools group that was sent to Texas Islamic schools has created misunderstanding and anger between local Muslims and Christians",
Iesa Galloway, Houston Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (search) said the questionnaire was "rooted in deep-seeded ignorance of the religion of Islam and the Muslim people."
For most Americans, "deep-seeded" is pronounced exactly the same way as "deep-seated", due to (what linguists call) flapping and voicing of /t/ in words like
seated, as in many other contexts (e.g. in
fatter and
rabbiting and
at all, but not in
attack). And in terms of the current ordinary-language meaning of the words involved, "deep-seeded ignorance" makes sense, while "deep-seated ignorance" doesn't. Ignorance can be planted deep and thus have deep metaphorical roots, but deep-seated ignorance would have to be ignorance cut with a lot of room in the crotch, or maybe ignorance sitting in a badly-designed armchair.
Still, Fox News needs better copy editors.
The established phrase is "
deep-seated", which is listed in any good dictionary and has 590,000 Google hits, while "deep-seeded" is not listed in any dictionary (at least as far as I've checked), and has only 24,800 Google hists, so that the public vote is 96%
for seated, 4%
for seeded.
We've been
accused recently of "let[ting] stodgy prescriptivism out into Language Log". In fact, I'm a linguistic libertarian -- I think you should speak and write as you please, but you should also understand what you're doing, and accept the consequences. In this case, if you write about "deep-seeded ignorance", you'll be using what most educated people will take to be a misconstrual of a long-established phrase.