Grammarize me.

[Chefguy]

I’m used to corp-speak and the odd things done to language in the name of business and expediency. And it’s cool that English is such a flexible language that meanings can be derived from almost any manipulation. But some things just don’t seem right. In a meeting the other day, the client said he would like to see a piece of equipment “ruggedized”. My head came up at that, but that little center in your brain that says “hmmmm…could be” said “hmmmmm…could be”, and I let it go. Later on, one of my colleagues was talking about standardization of some areas and said that he was trying to “genericize” everything. Say what?

Is this actually a correct bastardization? Can we tack -ize on the end of any noun and create a verboid? I’m not a grammar nazi; I’d just like to know the rule so my brain can go back to its usual comatose state.

[TheLoadedDog]

Heck, you don’t even need to tack “-ize” on, if you’re speaking corporate English. Just take any ol’ noun, and if you decide it’s a verb, then it’s a verb! Try to dimension the impacts of this, and you’ll see that I’m right…

…ongoingly.

[CookingWithGas]

Well, new words can be coined in a number of ways. “Verbizing” a noun isn’t necessarily wrong. It’s not really a grammar issue. Sometimes it fits into such a big gaping hole that it catches on. Many such words have crept into common use in the business world (prioritize, monetize).

(But I think it’s usually lazy and I don’t personally care for it.)

[Beadalin]

I’ve heard “genericize” a lot, but then again, I work in Marketing. It’s a handy word in that context; we use it to mean taking branding or other identifying information out of a piece so that it can be used for situations other than what that piece was created for.

“Ruggedize,” though. Whoo, boy. I think adding “-ize” to the end of something is a lazy crutch for someone who just hasn’t thought about a more accurate way to say something.

P.S. “Generic” and “rugged” are adjectives, not nouns. So it’s more like verbing an adjective. Fun with languagfe continues!

[thelurkinghorror]

Calvin and Hobbes: “Verbing weirds language.”

There’s nothing wrong with coining a word if it provides a better explanation of something, although the person mentioned in the OP could have used a little more imagination.

However, corporatespeak often strangeifies things by utilising new words when an existifying word works perfectly well in its place.

[BwanaBob]

@Beadalin

I’ve heard “genericize” a lot, but then again, I work in Marketing. It’s a handy word in that context; we use it to mean taking branding or other identifying information out of a piece so that it can be used for situations other than what that piece was created for.

“Ruggedize,” though. Whoo, boy. I think adding “-ize” to the end of something is a lazy crutch for someone who just hasn’t thought about a more accurate way to say something.

P.S. “Generic” and “rugged” are adjectives, not nouns. So it’s more like verbing an adjective. Fun with languagfe continues!

“Ruggedize” isn’t new. I remember it being used in the early 80’s with reference to a ruggedized VAX computer for the military; being one that could take a little “punishment” and keep functioning.

[jharvey963]

@BwanaBob

“Ruggedize” isn’t new. I remember it being used in the early 80’s with reference to a ruggedized VAX computer for the military; being one that could take a little “punishment” and keep functioning.

I’ve actually heard “ruggedize” a lot, and, like this guy, for decades. I used to work many years ago for government contractors. Ruggedize was used as a synonym for “harden”, which meant both able to take a little punishment, AND able to survive the EMP from a nuclear blast.

J.

[CurtC]

I am resistant to invented corp-speak, and will avoid using them until the bitter end. You’ll never hear me say “proactive” or use “dialog” as a verb. But the word “ruggedize” isn’t even remarkable. It and “ruggedized” have been around forever and serve a useful purpose. I’m surprised that it would make you even notice.

[Frylock]

@Chefguy

I’m used to corp-speak and the odd things done to language in the name of business and expediency. And it’s cool that English is such a flexible language that meanings can be derived from almost any manipulation. But some things just don’t seem right. In a meeting the other day, the client said he would like to see a piece of equipment “ruggedized”. My head came up at that, but that little center in your brain that says “hmmmm…could be” said “hmmmmm…could be”, and I let it go. Later on, one of my colleagues was talking about standardization of some areas and said that he was trying to “genericize” everything. Say what?

Is this actually a correct bastardization? Can we tack -ize on the end of any noun and create a verboid? I’m not a grammar nazi; I’d just like to know the rule so my brain can go back to its usual comatose state.

The examples you gave don’t license “tackize.” The construction you heard adds “ize” to an adjective, but “tackize” adds it to a verb.

Anyway, what’s a “correct bastardization?”

-FrL-

[Beadalin]

Wow, I’d truly never heard “ruggedize” before. Could it be another industry thing, or is it more widespread than that and I’d just missed it?

[CookingWithGas]

@Frylock

The examples you gave don’t license “tackize.” The construction you heard adds “ize” to an adjective, but “tackize” adds it to a verb.

The OP said “Can we tack -ize on the end of any noun. . . .” where “tack” means “append.” The OP did not construct “tackize” as a word.

[RealityChuck]

The OED has cites for “ruggedize” dating to 1954:

@OED

1954 Electronic Engin. XXVI. 255 The recent introduction of ‘ruggedized’ valves. 1958 C. C. ADAMS Space Flight 198 Automatic-control mechanisms must be added to the ship so that maneuvers can be programmed into them while the men are lying all but helpless on their contour chairs. And these equipments themselves must be ‘ruggedized’ to withstand the very accelerations they are compensating for. 1959 Wall St. Jrnl. (Eastern ed.) 18 May 13/3 There are no two ways about it. Ruggedization is costly.

Note “ruggedization” in the thire example. So the use is over 50 years old. Hardly new.

[dwc1970]

Google returns 1,620,000 hits for “ruggedized”, though only 22,700 for “ruggedize.” Clearly it’s quite a common construction on the word.

[Frylock]

@CookingWithGas

The OP said “Can we tack -ize on the end of any noun. . . .” where “tack” means “append.” The OP did not construct “tackize” as a word.

Oops! :smack:

-FrL-

[Chefguy]

New, not new, common or not; that’s not relevant to my question, so please practice your worldliness elsewhere. I’ve never heard either of them used in my 59 years on the planet and 23 years in the military. Many words have made their way into the lexicon, technically correct or not (“tasking” comes to mind), but my question (remember way back 12 whole posts ago?) was whether or not this is a legitimate grammatical change to a non-verb. I gather it’s technically not. I agree that the coining of a word will often clarify an idea, and use some of them myself, I’m sure.