Timeline for Is "actioned" a valid word?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14, 2017 at 10:05 | comment | added | Reversed Engineer | Business English may be the worst definition of what valid English is. The people sprouting it have exactly the wrong agenda (marketing as opposed to facts, trying to sound sophisticated). E.g. "Leverage" used as a verb, "Incentivize", and "Revert" used to mean "reply". | |
| Jun 27, 2017 at 6:16 | comment | added | psmears | @aaa90210: That's a matter of opinion :-) You're right it's in common use - that's a fact - hence why I said it's not invalid. But it's also a fact that lots of people do find it ugly, and if you want those people not to find your writing ugly, then you may want to avoid it. Just because you're not one of those people doesn't mean they don't exist ;-) | |
| Jun 26, 2017 at 21:30 | comment | added | aaa90210 | bullfrog answer. it is in common usage, is neither awkward, jarring or ugly. It is just a word. | |
| S Jan 13, 2016 at 4:19 | history | edited | Lawrence | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
perhaps we could also use "processed"
|
| S Jan 13, 2016 at 4:19 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
perhaps we could also use "processed"
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 3:55 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 13, 2016 at 4:19 | |||||
| Mar 9, 2011 at 13:46 | vote | accept | DMA57361 | ||
| Mar 9, 2011 at 13:46 | comment | added | DMA57361 | Ah, I think you've hit the nail on the head here - essentially it's not in common usage, except as management-speak. In which case, I shall continued to try and avoid using it; just need to teach my fingers not to type it when I'm not looking... | |
| Mar 9, 2011 at 13:02 | history | answered | psmears | CC BY-SA 2.5 |