Nominalisation: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(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...")
 
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.