Abebooks.com, the source for used books, sent out a list of its most expensive sales in April. On the plus side, it's nice that #3 is, at least in part, a photography title (and readily available for far less if you'll settle for the non-limited version); on the minus side, it's a little discouraging that even a bookseller doesn't know when to use a semicolon instead of a comma. But I curmudge.
Mike
Featured Comment by John Taylor: "In the words of Calvin & Hobbes, 'verbing weirds language.' That said, English being beyond weird, 'curmudge' certainly looks to be a very useful weirding!"
It's a sad, sad world. Really. Especially given the lack of what would be a very useful verb.
Posted by: stephen | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 01:10 PM
Bah, humbug...
Those thousands of dollars depress me.
Posted by: erlik | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 01:20 PM
In complete contrast, I just picked up probably the best photobook bargain of the month: Taschen 25th anniversary edition of Atget's Paris for £8 sterling.
Posted by: Martin Doonan | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 01:22 PM
For you, it's a verb...
Posted by: Bill Bresler | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 02:02 PM
Hi Mike,
Dunno if you've ever been to Rockport,ME.
but Tim Whelan's bookstore should be on your list of visits when you rent my cottage when I am in Italy. No shortage of photo books here.
http://360colors.com/mmw808/Whelan-Bookstore/index_swf.html
Posted by: dale moreau | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 02:19 PM
Dear Mike,
I think it's a fine verb, but OED doesn't have it. So it is either incredibly obscure, very recent, or original with you.
BTW, 'curmudgeon''s origin is unknown; first citation for it is late 16th Century. Spelling's varied (surprise!) but meaning's pretty much the same.
pax / Ctein
"Never get in a knife fight with a man with an OED."
Posted by: ctein | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 02:36 PM
Mr. Johnston,
Artist, Critic, Literary Maven, and now, truly a Smith of Words.
Bron
Posted by: Bron Janulis | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 03:16 PM
You could always outsource:
www.nomorepencils.com/2008/07/nouns-adjectives-and-other-parts-of-speech/
Posted by: [email protected] | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 05:20 PM
I heart how you make a headline tangential to the article.
Posted by: Eolake Stobblehouse | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 06:32 PM
My daughter always proclaims that her dad has his own rules of English..."Any word other than A, AN, & THE can be used as any part of speach!" [chuckle]
Posted by: In the Viewfinder | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 08:32 PM
You can verb anything.
Posted by: Mark Sirota | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 09:04 PM
Mark,
True, but some of them I cannot get used to. "To impact"? No....
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 09:23 PM
P.S. Dale, that's a very cool link. I love those moving panoramas.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 09:32 PM
Camp's first rule (of everything): nearly any noun, muttered in the right tone of voice, can be converted to slang for a woman's breasts:
Look at the hubcaps on that one; look at the garbanzos on that one; look at the Kodaks on that one; look at the popsicles on that one; look at the cabbages on that one; look at the hooters on that one; and so on. The exceptions are words that could be possible slang for other female body parts; it's not that you can't use it for breasts, it's just that it might be confusing: look at the cans on that one; look at the wheels on that one; look at the USB port ...well, maybe not.
JC
Posted by: John Camp | Saturday, 02 May 2009 at 11:06 PM
True, but some of them I cannot get used to. "To impact"? No....
Well, lucky you're not a doctor and you don't have to use phrases like "impacted fracture". :-)
Seriously, the verb use predates the noun use by almost two centuries. 1601 vs. 1781.
What I find offensive is the words like "proactive" and that has been in the language for almost a century.
Posted by: erlik | Sunday, 03 May 2009 at 03:07 AM
"Seriously, the verb use predates the noun use by almost two centuries. 1601 vs. 1781."
That's comforting to hear. Maybe it will help me get over my aversion.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Sunday, 03 May 2009 at 03:40 AM
Dear Erlik,
Can't find that in my OED. Want to give me a source citation for the verb form? (Maybe I'm spelling the verb form wrong.)
OED has first noun use as 1574 (not 1781), but it gives no verb form at all.
pax / curious Ctein
Posted by: ctein | Sunday, 03 May 2009 at 02:39 PM
This is reminding me of Richard Buckminster's "I seem to be a verb."
Posted by: John A. Stovall | Sunday, 03 May 2009 at 09:18 PM
"'I seem to be a verb.'"
John,
Not to mention a family of carbon allotropes. [g]
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Monday, 04 May 2009 at 04:34 AM
Here's verb form at Merriam-Webster and here's the noun form.
My Collins cites both a noun and a verb form, but from C18, no exact date.
Online etymology dictionary confirms the verb date, although it's not clear where they got it. And it meant "to press closely into something," very close in meaning to "impinge". The "forcefully strike" meaning comes from 1916, though.
The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology says impact sb. XVIII. f. impact-, pp. stem of L. impingere IMPINGE.
And here's another source that says the verb was used at the beginning of the 17th century, although where they pulled that out from is anybody's guess. And they do kinda confirm that 1916. date for the meaning people generally use now.
Posted by: erlik | Monday, 04 May 2009 at 08:02 AM
erlik is correct, but that's the problem: impact is being used as a verb, but incorrectly, or perhaps indiscriminately.
You'll notice that every definition for the verb form gives as an example a medical, or "technical" use. That's no accident since the verb form is supposed to be used to describe the physical coming-together of objects.
What is in vogue, especially in corporate circles (though I hope it's so in vogue as to be soon out-of-vogue) is to sound "high-tech", and thus many an e-mail to one's boss has included sentences like:
"Making this change will impact at least one of our downstream processes."
--when "Making this change will AFFECT..." would have worked perfectly well.
I think "impact" as a verb was appropriated, consciously or not, by people who wanted to sound more "technical", and by extension more intelligent.
Posted by: jchristian | Monday, 04 May 2009 at 12:23 PM
"I think 'impact' as a verb was appropriated, consciously or not, by people who wanted to sound more 'technical,' and by extension more intelligent."
jchristian,
Most probably--sort of like everybody now uses "image" in place of "picture," a woeful development in my opinion. (And I loathe the word "imagery" for "pictures.")
In the case of "impact" I think it's also a case of, well, impact inflation--"affect" is just not a very forceful word, and in addition people get confused between "affect" and "effect." This weakness leaves an opening for a harder-hitting word to sneak in.
Remember that famous definition of cursing--"the inarticulate mind attempting to express itself forcefully." Cf. also the number of words that once had more subtle definitions that have been appropriated to mean "good," because plain "good" was never good enough--starting with "great," which originally just meant big. People always go for words that have more (sorry) impact.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Monday, 04 May 2009 at 02:56 PM
Dear Erlick,
Oops, my error!
I thought you were talking about "curmudgeon" and "curmudge!"
Never mind. [smile]
pax / befuddled Ctein
(P.S. Does one make someone 'befuddled' by 'befudding' them???)
Posted by: ctein | Monday, 04 May 2009 at 03:26 PM
"Making this change will impact at least one of our downstream processes."
--when "Making this change will AFFECT..." would have worked perfectly well.
Mike is right that "affect" is not a very forceful word. It is, in fact, a sinuous and slinky word. "It starts to affect me..." Mmmmm. :-) Why do you think Hunter S. Thompson used the famous phrase "I'm 3 hours outta barstow, when the drugs start to kick in." Talk about force.
But!
What is wrong with "will have impact on"? Nothing.
Man, word geekery on TOP. :-)
Posted by: erlik | Monday, 04 May 2009 at 04:19 PM
Mike - the affect/effect confusion has gotta be part of it. I didn't think of that. Most of us fall into patterns, and rather than puzzle over whether to use "have an impact on", "will affect", "cause an unexpected effect", etc, people go with "Dear God, this will negatively impact us all!" ;-)
erlik, that's a great quote/example. "...when the drugs start to affect me" does not have the same... kick!
Oh, and here's another dubious one:
"Let's LEVERAGE the results that the other team got and use them in our process."
Once again, there's a verb already: LEVER. It's all about sounding technical.
If one really has to use the term in this way, you could write "We might save some time if we lever off of the previous results." Or "There's leverage to be gained from..."
Aargh, I give up. Yes, I know most people do not care, and the world keeps spinning...
Posted by: jchristian | Tuesday, 05 May 2009 at 02:41 PM
"Aargh, I give up. Yes, I know most people do not care, and the world keeps spinning..."
Well, don't give up. The world spins and the language changes. Sometimes, I admit, I choose not to write the "proper" form because it's unidiomatic. But lots and lots of what I've learned about proper usage comes from encountering words used well in print and orally. So when you use a word correctly, you pass along the priceless heritage of the best thinkers and speakers who preceded you. Reason enough to do it!
Solidarnosc,
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Tuesday, 05 May 2009 at 04:20 PM