WWTBAM Bored

Former defensive back who played on the NY Giants Super Bowl team. He was suspended for four games the next year for violating the NFL's substance policy and left the league after that. He was also arrested in 2014 for trying to evade police on a scooter while intoxicated (they had to tase him). He was found dead in his home. An autopsy is planned for tomorrow, but I'd be willing to bet there were some substances involved in his death. An unfamiliar name but a sadly too familiar story.

Age 27.

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2015 ... ports.html

"Tase" is not a verb, bro!

Estonut wrote:"Tase" is not a verb, bro!

Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

Bob Juch wrote:

Estonut wrote:"Tase" is not a verb, bro!

Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

Estonut wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

Estonut wrote:"Tase" is not a verb, bro!

Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

I know that this one is in common use, which pretty much trumps old dead guys, since both of these inventions came after said old dead guys died. How would YOU verb it?

Estonut wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

Estonut wrote:"Tase" is not a verb, bro!

Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

Language evolves as it evolves, not according to the rules you happen to want to follow.

If people accept "tase" as a verb, then it's a verb, and you'll just have to deal with it.

Jeemie wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

Language evolves as it evolves, not according to the rules you happen to want to follow.

If people accept "tase" as a verb, then it's a verb, and you'll just have to deal with it.

Esto is not good at dealing with it.

mrkelley23 wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

I know that this one is in common use, which pretty much trumps old dead guys, since both of these inventions came after said old dead guys died. How would YOU verb it?

The same way. The back-formation argument in your link does not apply, since "-er" is NOT a suffix. "LASER" is a capitalized acronym of "Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation," so the proper verb form is "Lasered."

Jeemie wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:Misters Merriam and Webster disagree:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tase

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

Language evolves as it evolves, not according to the rules you happen to want to follow.

If people accept "tase" as a verb, then it's a verb, and you'll just have to deal with it.

OK. So usage drives it all. Once enough people do the following, it will all be correct:

• Using "loose" when one means "lose."
• Wierd
• Using "Their," "They're" and "There" interchangeably.
• Using "You're" and "Your" interchangeably.
• Using "It's" and "Its" interchangeably.
• Definately
• Using "Effect" and "Affect" interchangeably.
• Using "Alot" instead of "a lot."
• Using "Then" and "Than" interchangeably.

Estonut wrote: If people accept "tase" as a verb, then it's a verb, and you'll just have to deal with it.

OK. So usage drives it all. Once enough people do the following, it will all be correct:

• Using "loose" when one means "lose."
• Wierd
• Using "Their," "They're" and "There" interchangeably.
• Using "You're" and "Your" interchangeably.
• Using "It's" and "Its" interchangeably.
• Definately
• Using "Effect" and "Affect" interchangeably.
• Using "Alot" instead of "a lot."
• Using "Then" and "Than" interchangeably.[/quote]

I will admit to using the wrong "their","there",or "they're" on occasion when talking to someone.

I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."[/quote]I know that this one is in common use, which pretty much trumps old dead guys, since both of these inventions came after said old dead guys died. How would YOU verb it?[/quote]The same way. The back-formation argument in your link does not apply, since "-er" is NOT a suffix. "LASER" is a capitalized acronym of "Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation," so the proper verb form is "Lasered."[/quote]

I don't know by whose authority you presume to pronounce how verbs must be formed, whether from acronyms or not, but I can tell you that technicians in the field of lasers, as well as technical journals which I read, all exclusively use the verb "lase" when talking about lasers.


For instance: The Handbook of Lasers

Or maybe this one: Fundamentals of light sources and lasers

And, oh, look! Here's a site from BrightHub which claims that back-formation can happen with actual OR SUPPOSED (emphasis mine) derivational affixes, and lists lase as an example of said back-formation.

My own opinion, no source or anything, is that if an acronym enters enough common use to be de-capitalized (as laser, maser, and taser all have), then they are ripe for back-formation. YMMV.

Estonut wrote:OK. So usage drives it all. Once enough people do the following, it will all be correct:

• Using "loose" when one means "lose."
• Wierd
• Using "Their," "They're" and "There" interchangeably.
• Using "You're" and "Your" interchangeably.
• Using "It's" and "Its" interchangeably.
• Definately
• Using "Effect" and "Affect" interchangeably.
• Using "Alot" instead of "a lot."
• Using "Then" and "Than" interchangeably.

Yes- it will all be correct.

You're getting it.

This thread both reeked havoc and peaked my interest!

Estonut wrote:

Jeemie wrote:

Estonut wrote:I kind of doubt that, as they've both been dead for over 100 years. I don't care what the hipsters running M-W now have to say. They're wrong. Back-formation does not apply here because the "-er" in "Taser" (actually "TASER") is NOT a suffix. The whole term is a capitalized acronym (Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle). Thus, the only proper form of a corresponding verb is "Tasered."

Language evolves as it evolves, not according to the rules you happen to want to follow.

If people accept "tase" as a verb, then it's a verb, and you'll just have to deal with it.

OK. So usage drives it all. Once enough people do the following, it will all be correct:

• Using "loose" when one means "lose."
• Wierd
• Using "Their," "They're" and "There" interchangeably.
• Using "You're" and "Your" interchangeably.
• Using "It's" and "Its" interchangeably.
• Definately
• Using "Effect" and "Affect" interchangeably.
• Using "Alot" instead of "a lot."
• Using "Then" and "Than" interchangeably.

These seem to all be written rules of grammar (in fact, almost all of them don't apply at all to oral language), many of which I violate not because I don't know any better, but because I'm a shitty proofreader who types faster than he thinks. Using "tased" and "lased" come about from speaking habits, and are probably used because it's so much easier to say less to mean more when everyone knows what you're talking about anyway. That's why we have contractions in the first place... I'd bet they first showed up in oral language rather than written (poets be damned, nobody can understand what they're saying anyway). Now that (almost) everyone texts constantly, those shortcuts we used to speak are now showing up even more and more in the written word, and as jeemie said, those cunning linguists are just going to have to learn to deal with the changes to come...

Fo sho...

lb13

Sash's family has released autopsy results confirming that Sash suffered from CTE at the time of his death. According to this article, Sash's case was about the most advanced they had discovered in someone his age (he died at the age of 27 after suffering at least five concussions).

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/27/sport ... .html?_r=0

In a somewhat related story, Dr. Bennet Omalu, whose findings led to the NFL's current concussion protocols and who was the subject of the Will Smith film Concussion is convinced that O.J. Simpson suffers from CTE as well (you can't know for sure until someone dies and an autopsy is performed).

http://www.people.com/article/dr-bennet ... s-from-cte

silverscreenselect wrote:In a somewhat related story, Dr. Bennet Omalu, whose findings led to the NFL's current concussion protocols and who was the subject of the Will Smith film Concussion is convinced that O.J. Simpson suffers from CTE as well (you can't know for sure until someone dies and an autopsy is performed).

I'm for accelerating that process in his case.

silverscreenselect wrote:In a somewhat related story, Dr. Bennet Omalu, whose findings led to the NFL's current concussion protocols and who was the subject of the Will Smith film Concussion is convinced that O.J. Simpson suffers from CTE as well

Cuba Gooding Jr., who plays O.J. in the upcoming series The People v. O.J. Simpson, thinks so too.

TV Guide wrote:Why do you think you've had luck playing football players? I played varsity in high school and thought that was the career I wanted. Then I said to my girlfriend, “I’m not going to play pro football, but I could be a pro football player in a movie.” I swear my career grew out of that statement. I also think I understand how they hold themselves, that supreme confidence. Sometimes I do believe that a lot of their violent behavior—like O.J. in Nicole’s 911 calls—could be a result of concussions on the field.

BTW, TV Guide gave the show an excellent review, and I'll watch it.

silverscreenselect wrote:(you can't know for sure until someone dies and an autopsy is performed).

For medical science's sake, let's hope it's soon.