It's okay to use "impact" as a verb. |
|
Votes: 554
Comments: 5
Added: December 2004
| rhapsomatrics - 7th February 2005 20:38 |
| The word is phonetically polysemous.Bi-syllabic words like this form their meaning from pronunciation(stress).Any bi-syllable(or most) which is stressed on the first syllable or which places the primary stress on the first syllable is usually a noun.But where the primary stress falls on the second syllable the word becomes a verb....eg..IMport(noun)...imPORT(ve rb)...PROduce(noun)...proDUCE(verb). ..IMpact(noun)...imPACT(verb) |
| SAL - 18th September 2007 16:40 |
| While I agree that language evolves, I abhore the conversion of nouns to verbs simply because the word must be initially misused in order to ever make it into common speech in the first place. The fact that most of these conversions are because of use in business and press circles further exacerbates my ire since many of these people are trying to be innovative and cute as opposed to correct and concise. How can educators enforce the proper rules of grammar if those rules can be changed according to anyone's whim? Are we that afraid to tell someone that they are wrong? |
| Vidableek - 3rd October 2008 15:34 |
| I think it's fine in the rigth context. "When the meteor impacted" is fine. "Then the baseball will impact" is fine. But "I am currently impacting" is not. |
| Scott - 5th May 2009 16:37 |
| I have to agree with Sal - although I would add that while language evolves, it can also DE-evolve (though I am inventing a word) and degrade. We seem to be allowing the English language to simultaneously evolve and create more meaning, and degrade such that it loses structure and becomes less "universal". English is thus becoming increasingly difficult to understand from one place and context to the next! |
| nete - 20th September 2009 19:36 |
| i think impact isnt a verb so why do we need to do that |
