“Edit” and “access” also weren’t originally verbs. Same with “babysit” and “eavesdrop”. Backformation and category changing are common and perfectly natural processes in English.
Edit: This isn’t directed at the OP of this comment chain, but I’m always surprised by the crazy amount of ignorant prescriptivism I see all over Lemmy. Like, I expected that shit on Reddit, but I thought we were better than that here, especially since literally the only real reason for prescriptivism is sowing class division and excluding people for not having access to the secret knowledge of “correct” (yuck!) grammar.
Nope, I can do this all day. Other fun examples of backformation off the top of my head are: “to burgle” from “burglar” (which the Brits still get mad about (note: this is incorrect, see conversation below)), originally from the Latin agent noun burglator from the verb burgare; and “cherry”, backformed from Old French cerise, which was reinterpreted as a plural (even though it wasn’t one), and then a new singular form was backformed. The same thing happened to “pea” (though that’s a native English word) - you can still see the original “pease” in the old nursery rhyme: “Pease porridge hot, pease porridge cold, pease porridge in a pot nine days old”.
can’t be wooshed if the joke wasn’t funny. I’m like you, spontaneously going into long rants on linguistic fun facts. most people ignore me. I enjoyed your brief history on verbification
Ah, yep, you’re absolutely right, it is “burglarize” that gets y’all riled up. That’s what I get for going off memory and not checking my sources. I’ve edited my comment above to point out the error.
verbing a word that isn’t commonly verbed? that’s the main thing i love in the English langauge, the flexibility to fuck around with it and still be understood by others without having to explain what you’re doing
Using the suffix -er for a two syllable word isn’t any correcter than verbing a noun and would probably make quite a few English teachers red in the face.
Both have a linguistic use; the verb “vaguing” is a shortened form of the cumbersome “vague-posting”, while “stupider” is a more emphatic and/of colloquial form of “more stupid”. Neither can be replaced by their more formal form without changing the meaning of the sentence slightly.
Objectively they are very similar linguistic quirks, the only reason you’d use one but dislike the other is familiarity. Why dismiss it out of hand when you can excitedly marvel at a novel way people can remotely transfer thoughts?
Why are so many people okay with “vague posting” also? If people are posting vaguely so often you need to make up a weird term for it, the reaction is to go to another space, not adopt yet another abbreviation to accommodate such shitbirds
“Edit” and “access” also weren’t originally verbs. Same with “babysit” and “eavesdrop”. Backformation and category changing are common and perfectly natural processes in English.
Edit: This isn’t directed at the OP of this comment chain, but I’m always surprised by the crazy amount of ignorant prescriptivism I see all over Lemmy. Like, I expected that shit on Reddit, but I thought we were better than that here, especially since literally the only real reason for prescriptivism is sowing class division and excluding people for not having access to the secret knowledge of “correct” (yuck!) grammar.
Did you Google that?
Nope, I can do this all day. Other fun examples of backformation off the top of my head are: “to burgle” from “burglar” (which the Brits still get mad about (note: this is incorrect, see conversation below)), originally from the Latin agent noun burglator from the verb burgare; and “cherry”, backformed from Old French cerise, which was reinterpreted as a plural (even though it wasn’t one), and then a new singular form was backformed. The same thing happened to “pea” (though that’s a native English word) - you can still see the original “pease” in the old nursery rhyme: “Pease porridge hot, pease porridge cold, pease porridge in a pot nine days old”.
I was making a joke with a modern example of a noun being verbified, but thank you for your insight.
Oh wow, I’m feeling very whooshed at the moment. Sorry about that.
can’t be wooshed if the joke wasn’t funny. I’m like you, spontaneously going into long rants on linguistic fun facts. most people ignore me. I enjoyed your brief history on verbification
deleted by creator
Ah, yep, you’re absolutely right, it is “burglarize” that gets y’all riled up. That’s what I get for going off memory and not checking my sources. I’ve edited my comment above to point out the error.
I understand language changes over time but sometimes it’s stupider than others
verbing a word that isn’t commonly verbed? that’s the main thing i love in the English langauge, the flexibility to fuck around with it and still be understood by others without having to explain what you’re doing
Now you’re Englishing proper m8.
Literally didn’t understand it
From your biased, subjective point of view that has nothing to do with the objective facts of language, maybe.
Objectively, any words with more than two vocals in succession is dumb and only meant for cheating at Scrabble, objectively
Using the suffix
-erfor a two syllable word isn’t any correcter than verbing a noun and would probably make quite a few English teachers red in the face.Both have a linguistic use; the verb “vaguing” is a shortened form of the cumbersome “vague-posting”, while “stupider” is a more emphatic and/of colloquial form of “more stupid”. Neither can be replaced by their more formal form without changing the meaning of the sentence slightly.
Objectively they are very similar linguistic quirks, the only reason you’d use one but dislike the other is familiarity. Why dismiss it out of hand when you can excitedly marvel at a novel way people can remotely transfer thoughts?
Why are so many people okay with “vague posting” also? If people are posting vaguely so often you need to make up a weird term for it, the reaction is to go to another space, not adopt yet another abbreviation to accommodate such shitbirds