Nominalisation

From The Jolly Contrarian
Revision as of 11:49, 13 September 2016 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.