&quot;To make tangible&quot;

I always assumed that it just existed as a compound verb e.g. "To make + tangible" much in the same way that for example, the noun 'suicide' doesn't have a single word verb form i.e. you use "To commit" + suicide e.g. one would say " He commited suicide" rather then "He suicidified himself."

You can't always verbify a noun :wink:

Reply 6

a noun can always be verbed! :wink:

Reply 7

starry skies

a noun can always be verbed! :wink:

Not always in one word though and sometimes, you can't even make a very sensible compound verb... e.g. I can't think of a sensible compound verb for the noun 'grass'

Reply 8

figureeight

OP

11

Jake22

I always assumed that it just existed as a compound verb e.g. "To make + tangible" much in the same way that for example, the noun 'suicide' doesn't have a single word verb form i.e. you use "To commit" + suicide e.g. one would say " He commited suicide" rather then "He suicidified himself."

You can't always verbify a noun :wink:

I appreciate what you're saying, but tangible is an adjective, not a noun - so can every adjective be verbified :eek:

or not?

(Oh god, the verbification is getting deeper!!)

You can't say "I ate a tangible the other day, it was a particularly luscious tangible at that!" :wink:

Reply 9

Jake22

Not always in one word though and sometimes, you can't even make a very sensible compound verb... e.g. I can't think of a sensible compound verb for the noun 'grass'

I grassed the muddy area to make a lawn?!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3433726.ece

Reply 10

eventhorizon

I appreciate what you're saying, but tangible is an adjective, not a noun - so can every adjective be verbified :eek:

or not?

(Oh god, the verbification is getting deeper!!)

You can't say "I ate a tangible the other day, it was a particularly luscious tangible at that!" :wink:

Good point. I guess in that case To make tangible isn't a compound verb at all and I suppose it isn't being verbified per se, it is just an adjective describing the action of the verb as in "to paint green". So I guess a lot of adjectives can't be verbified but a lot can e.g. Clear/To clear

Reply 11

starry skies

I grassed the muddy area to make a lawn?!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3433726.ece

I suppose verbifying nouns and adjectives is becoming a lot more common nowadays although a lot still sound strange to me. For instance, I think it is only recently that 'To verbify' was considered common. Acceptance is always going to depend on context as usual e.g. To tangify would (probably) be understood in most contexts but it probably wouldn't be wise to use it in an academic paper.

Reply 12

Yeah, it's just funny to see how much people will twist the English language. If I saw someone write 'tangify' (or beverise for that matter) I'd shoot them! Personally I blame the horror that is 'txtspk' for an overall decline in standards of written English, but that's for another thread. :wink:

Reply 13

starry skies

Yeah, it's just funny to see how much people will twist the English language. If I saw someone write 'tangify' (or beverise for that matter) I'd shoot them! Personally I blame the horror that is 'txtspk' for an overall decline in standards of written English, but that's for another thread. :wink:

Personally, I don't mind it. The English language has always evolved and I prefer to embrace that. Really, what counts as 'proper English' is just a formality that is heavily dependent on context. Verbification of nouns, for example is a useful abbreviation. To me, the most important things are clarity and of course, a modicum of convention so that everyone understands each other. I personally don't like txtspk/l33tspeak but that is mainly because I think the efficiency saved in typing:
i) Is no longer needed as much due to more memory on mobile phones/internet facilities being at the stage where character length often isn't an issue
ii) Translates into an inefficiency for communicating as it generally doesn't parse as well as full words and often, is on too small a scale to be universal enough for everyone to understand it straight away without having to think what, for example, OMGWTFBBQ!!11!!one!!thirtyeight!!!111!!bagofwalnuts!!! is supposed to mean.

Reply 14

PlaystationStudies

8

'To manifest' or 'to manifest' might work depending on the context.

Reply 15

Jake22

Personally, I don't mind it. The English language has always evolved and I prefer to embrace that. Really, what counts as 'proper English' is just a formality that is heavily dependent on context. .

Yes, but it's really quite depressing to see covering letters for job applications that are almost incoherent. IMHO before you actually start 'playing' with a language you should understand the basic rules, especially if you ever want to communicate with someone for whom English isn't their 1st language.

I personally don't like txtspk/l33tspeak but that is mainly because I think the efficiency saved in typing:
Translates into an inefficiency for communicating as it generally doesn't parse as well as full words and often, is on too small a scale to be universal enough for everyone to understand it straight away without having to think what, for example, OMGWTFBBQ!!11!!one!!thirtyeight!!!111!!bagofwalnuts!!! is supposed to mean.

It's existential, man!

Reply 16