Nominalisation: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "The act, as adored by solicitors as it is loathed by anyone having any kind of fondness for the English language, of emasculating a perfectly usable verb by making it into a n..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The act, as adored by solicitors as it is loathed by anyone having any kind of fondness for the English language, of emasculating a perfectly usable verb by making it into a noun and jamming a more boring verb in front of it. | The act, as adored by solicitors as it is loathed by anyone having any kind of fondness for the English language, of emasculating a perfectly usable verb by making it into a noun and jamming a more boring verb in front of it. The ''cause célèbre'' of nominalisations — an attorney’s very favourite — is “to be applicable”. Here the very respectable noun “apply” is saddled with a ghastly suffix and made to give up its exciting role as a “doing” word, for the comparative lassitude of being a person place or thing — an abstract thing, at that — while that irregular catchall, to be, has all the fun. | ||
But at what cost to the reader: | |||
*This clause ''applies''. | |||
*This clause ''is applicable''. | |||
{{plain|issue a notification to|notify}} | {{plain|issue a notification to|notify}} | ||
{{plain|have a discussion|discuss}} | {{plain|have a discussion|discuss}} | ||
===Effecting a nominalisation=== | |||
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. | 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. | ||
Revision as of 11:49, 13 September 2016
The act, as adored by solicitors as it is loathed by anyone having any kind of fondness for the English language, of emasculating a perfectly usable verb by making it into a noun and jamming a more boring verb in front of it. The cause célèbre of nominalisations — an attorney’s very favourite — is “to be applicable”. Here the very respectable noun “apply” is saddled with a ghastly suffix and made to give up its exciting role as a “doing” word, for the comparative lassitude of being a person place or thing — an abstract thing, at that — while that irregular catchall, to be, has all the fun.
But at what cost to the reader:
- This clause applies.
- This clause is applicable.
Why say “issue a notification to” when you mean “notify”?
Why say “have a discussion” when you mean “discuss”?
Effecting a nominalisation
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.