Nominalisation

Nominalisation is, itself, a nominalisation of the verb to "nominalise". Goedel would be pleased.

Why say “have visibility of” when you mean “see”?
Why say “issue a notification to” when you mean “tell”?
Why say “have a discussion about” when you mean “discuss”?
Why say “we are supportive of” when you mean “we support”?
Why say “have the appearance of being” when you mean “seem”?

Nominalisation is the act, as adored by solicitors as it is loathed by anyone who cares for the English language, of gutting a precise verb, by converting it into a noun and jamming a general verb in front of it.

Or should I say:

Nominalisation is the act, which induces adoration in solicitors as much as it effects a sensation of loathing in anyone having a fondness for the English language, of ensuring the evisceration of a precise verb by effecting its conversion into a noun (or adjective) and ensuring the jammery of a general verb in front of it.

Dead give aways:

• the string “ion of”
• gerunds
• infinitives

Effecting a nominalisation: grammatical cross-dressing

The worst kind of nominalisation goes a step further: not only must the poor verb dress up as a noun; an equally unsuspecting noun must behave like a verb. “Effect” is this kind of nominalisation.

Not that there’s anything wrong with cross-dressing, mind.

See also

• Adjectivisation
• Of - a dead giveaway.
• To be - the feeblest of all verbs.
• Obligated