Effect: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "An effect is a, always, a noun. One may speak of the rainbow effect, or special effects,or, if one is a fan of the electric guitar, an effects pedal like Ibanez's lege...")
 
No edit summary
 
(21 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
An [[effect]] is a, always, a [[noun]]. One may speak of the rainbow effect, or special effects,or, if one is a fan of the electric guitar, an effects pedal like Ibanez's legendary {{google|tube-screamer}}
{{a|plainenglish|[[File:Ibanez-ts808-vintage-tube-screamer.jpg|thumb|center|400px|The original TS-808 [[Tube Screamer]] - everything you need for that fat, creamy, crying tone.]]}}
An [[effect]] is, ''always'', a [[noun]]. One may speak of the '''rainbow effect''', '''special effects''' or, if one is a fan of the [[electric guitar]], an '''effects pedal''' like Ibanez’s [[Tube Screamer]]<ref>{{google|tube-screamer}}.</ref> or Jim Dunlop’s [[Cry-Baby Wah-Wah]]<ref>{{google|Jim_Dunlop_Cry-Baby}}.</ref>.


but one must not use [[effect]] as a {{tag|verb}}, even as a space-filler, however clamorously your inner articled clerk implores you to do so. "Effect" is the weakest verb on the planet. Whatever you are intending to [[effect]] is almost certain to be a [[nominalisation]] of another, perfectly respectable verb one which is certain to be better suited to the task you have in mind than [[effect]]. for which it entered the lexicon.
Put those two puppies together: now ''that’s'' an “[[effect]]”. This is to say: the only place for “effects” is in front of a guitar amp, and even then you should stomp on the damn things.
 
One must ''not'' use [[effect]] as a {{tag|verb}}, even as a space-filler, however clamorously your inner [[Mediocre lawyer|articled clerk]] implores you to. “Effect” is the weakest {{tag|verb}} in the English language. Whatever you are intending to [[effect]]is almost certain to be a [[nominalisation]] of a stronger, better [[verb]]; one better suited to the task you have in mind.  


{{plain|effect the conversion of shares|convert the shares}}
{{plain|effect the conversion of shares|convert the shares}}
{{plain|effect the delivey of a notice|deliver a notice}}
{{plain|effect the delivey of a notice|deliver a notice}}
Why say “effect the butchery of a perfectly good sentence” when you mean -
Well, you get the point.
{{sa}}
*[[Nominalisation]]
*[[Noun]]s and [[verb]]s in their proper place.
{{ref}}

Latest revision as of 16:37, 3 July 2020

Towards more picturesque speech
The original TS-808 Tube Screamer - everything you need for that fat, creamy, crying tone.

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.


An effect is, always, a noun. One may speak of the rainbow effect, special effects or, if one is a fan of the electric guitar, an effects pedal like Ibanez’s Tube Screamer[1] or Jim Dunlop’s Cry-Baby Wah-Wah[2].

Put those two puppies together: now that’s an “effect”. This is to say: the only place for “effects” is in front of a guitar amp, and even then you should stomp on the damn things.

One must not use effect as a verb, even as a space-filler, however clamorously your inner articled clerk implores you to. “Effect” is the weakest verb in the English language. Whatever you are intending to “effect” is almost certain to be a nominalisation of a stronger, better verb; one better suited to the task you have in mind.

Why say “effect the conversion of shares” when you mean “convert the shares”?
Why say “effect the delivey of a notice” when you mean “deliver a notice”?
Why say “effect the butchery of a perfectly good sentence” when you mean -

Well, you get the point.

See also

References