What I intended to write full out was:
We have moved away from obsoleted technologies and technologies being deprecated.
What I actually wrote feels slightly awkward but I justified leaving it as such because it is concise, sits on my ear in an interesting way and is almost a bit poetic in its simplicity. However what I'm wondering is the validity of the statement:
We have moved away from obsoleted and technologies being deprecated.
We have moved away from obsoleted and technologies being deprecated.
makes no sense. "Obsoleted" what? You have an adjective and no noun to modify.
You would be better off saying
We have moved away from technologies that are obsoleted or being deprecated.
Perhaps you could also say something like
We have moved away from obsoleted and deprecated technologies.
but that sounds very business-speak in a bad way. I don't like the word "obsoleted" anyway. Why not just use "obsolete"?
By the way, obsoleted and deprecated are so similar that you might want to try to combine them.
We have moved away from obsolescent technologies.
Here "obsolescent" carries both meanings — osbsoleted and being deprecated — and you're already covered with the past tense because that's the job that "We have moved away ..." performs.
How about:
We have moved away from deprecated or obsolete technologies.
How about:
We have moved away from obsolete and deprecated technologies.
How can you make obsolete a transitive verb? I don't get that. And obsolescent just seems to be a haughtier means of conveying the fact that the technologies are passé; why not use the simpler adjective?
