incent : a big SOTA

[Matthew Gordon]

Isn't it the case that derivational suffixes normally block functional
shift? Faced with the very unverby 'incentive', these "insufficiently
fluent" people simply got rid of the bit that marked it as unverby.


On 1/26/06 9:22 AM, "Jonathan Lighter" <wuxxmupp2000 at YAHOO.COM> wrote:

> One more obnoxifying fact about "to incent" is that its users seemto be
> insufficiently fluent in their native language simply to employ a "functional
> shift" to create a new verb. To "incentive the consumer" sounds pretty lame
> too, but at bottom it's comparatively eloquent.
>
>   Can anyone name another verb that, like "incent," is formed by dropping the
> "-ive" from a familiar English noun ?
>
>   JL
>
> "Mark A. Mandel" <mamandel at LDC.UPENN.EDU> wrote:
>   ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender: American Dialect Society
> Poster: "Mark A. Mandel"
> Subject: Re: incent : a big SOTA
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------>
-
>
> Minority opinion coming up!
>
> I prefer it to "incentivize" [shudder].
>
> -- Mark A. Mandel
> [This text prepared with Dragon NaturallySpeaking.]
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
>  With a free 1 GB, there's more in store with Yahoo! Mail.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org