I am a rather rabid descriptivist, but every now and again a word comes along that tweaks my regressive, unevolved prescriptivist dark side. Today I stumbled across one such. Why "effectuate"? From what I've googled, it seems to be a direct synonym of "effect", so what's its raisin debt? Being the devout disciple of descriptivism that I am, I will demur to it if there's a reason for its existence, but at the moment, I can't see one.
"A most fit instrument to effectuate his desire." Sir Philip Sidney, Arcadia, II.127. (Though most of the citations of this quotation online drop the "most".) The Elizabethans loved playing with their words. Sidney's is the first citation in the OED.
The single pnline hit for the correct quotation is an entry at The Discouraging Word, a linguo-blog.
http://www.thediscouragingword.com/archives/arc3.shtml
Put to death without effectuating my purpose
Posted Friday, March 5, 2004
[an excerpt]
That effectuating caught in our throat, and we promptly began to gag all over the margins of the page, in the form of hastily scribbled exclamation and question marks. We found it absurd that Toth would import this pseudo-sophisticated -uated word when the short, simple effect would work just as well -- indeed, it would work much better precisely because it doesn't sound needlessly affected.
But, of course, we had to sneak a peek at the OED before we launched our planned polemic against effectuate. Perhaps not surprisingly, the word's earliest uses date to the Renaissance, which seems to suit it well: a stately, bombastic word for a stately, bombastic period. Sidney's Arcadia (1580) provides the first usage example, and the word sounds perfectly at home: "He found him a most fit instrument to effectuate his desire." And, perhaps also not unexpectedly, that dictionary maker of another orotund era -- Johnson -- uttered the word at least once within Boswell's hearing, almost 200 years after Sidney let loose with it: "I should probably be put to death without effectuating my purpose."
At the end of the entry he notes that Garner's Modern American Usage finds a subtle difference of meaning between effect and effectuate, but many stylists feel as you do.
If it's good enough for Sir Philip and Dr Johnson, it's good enough for the rest of us.
[Edited for typo and to reinstate Johnson's title]
Why "effectuate"? From what I've googled, it seems to be a direct synonym of "effect", so what's its raisin debt?
"Effect" as a verb is basically a muddled mess. The main reason that people have problems spelling the affect/effect pair is that they just don't fit together well. If you affect something you have an effect on it. Using effect as a verb or affect as a noun just sounds wrong. Effectuate has the advantage of being unequivocally a verb and there's no chance of confusing it with affect.
that tweaks my regressive, unevolved prescriptivist dark side.
My regressive, unevolved prescriptivist dark side loves it when Max talks like this.
regressive, unevolved prescriptivist dark side
Yeah! Doncha just love it when someone rejects a perfectly good, unequivocal word in favor of one that will sow confusion among those less regressive and unevolved than you?
In reply to:
The main reason that people have problems spelling the affect/effect pair is that they just don't fit together well. If you affect something you have an effect on it. Using effect as a verb or affect as a noun just sounds wrong. Effectuate has the advantage of being unequivocally a verb and there's no chance of confusing it with affect.
Good enough for me. One of the hardest challenges I faced tutoring a Punjabi nursing student over the last 6 months was helping her grasp the effect/affect difference. She really struggled. Coincidentally, my first sight of "effectuate" was in a piece by a person of Indian origin. You've persuaded me to beat my inner prescriptivist back into its usual coma. Thanks, Fong.
>>One of the hardest challenges I faced tutoring a Punjabi nursing student over the last 6 months was helping her grasp the effect/affect difference.
Did you try going bowling, throwing balls at bottles, or playing the dunking machine at some backwoods carnival?
You've persuaded me to beat my inner prescriptivist back into its usual coma.
When it wakes up, I'll be there at the bedside keeping vigil.
I'll be there at the bedside keeping vigil.
We a team, Daddio.
In reply to:
And, perhaps also not unexpectedly, that dictionary maker of another orotund era -- Johnson -- uttered the word at least once within Boswell's hearing, almost 200 years after Sidney let loose with it: "I should probably be put to death without effectuating my purpose."
At the end of the entry he notes that Garner's Modern American Usage finds a subtle difference of emaning between effect and effectuate, but many stylists feel as you do.
If it's good enough for Sir Philip and Mr Johnson, it's good enough for the rest of us.
And when, pray, was Samuel Johnson stripped of his doctorate?
Bingley
Mis-using affect/effect is one of my pet peeves. If you can replace the troubling word with "influence", then the verb to use is affect. Effect as a verb means to bring about, as in "to effect change." However, the noun forms do get murky because effect as a noun means result. The noun, affect , is something we use in educational studies a lot as something within the learning environment or the learner's background that affects (influences) how the learner views the effect (result) Now isn't just about as clear as mud?
clear as mud
Its very problem, as I pointed out earlier.
> clear as mud?
Nope, purty darn clear, Miss - thanks!
(and welcome, Gin)