When you perform an action again, you can usually just put "re" in front of the existing verb - e.g. "shuffle" becomes "reshuffle".

However, "resort" is its own word that doesn't mean "to sort again" - is there a word that does mean that?

  • 8
    How about re-sort? Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 15:06
  • 2
    – WS2
    Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 16:33
  • 1
    If you're not looking for anything fancy I think "re-sort" is the appropriate word.
    – Hot Licks
    Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 18:43
  • The fact that two or more words have the same spelling doesn't make any difference. People will read it as resort, as in 'to fall back on', only because they're unfamiliar with resort as meaning re-sort.
    – Carl Smith
    Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 1:53
  • I think "resort" is fine; "resort" and "resort" are homographs. Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 5:15

4 Answers 4


I may be wrong but in case a word has re- as part of it, maybe there is a point to mark it as 're‑sort'. That will mean 'Sort again'. Of course, that makes sense when you write, not speak.

Here's: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/re-sort

  • 8
    +1 It makes sense even in speech, we don't pronounce the two alike. Just say them aloud and you'll see that they are distinct -- very different, in fact. Or check the source you have cited.
    – Kris
    Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 15:12
  • 12
    And if you don't like that resource, then maybe you can re-source it.
    – Hellion
    Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 15:18
  • 3
    I don't think that is a general rule. "Resent" could mean either "hate", or "sent again", both without hyphenation
    – Tymric
    Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 18:34
  • 2
    It's quite common to see "re-sent" for the latter meaning. This is a non-standardized (or semi-standardized) way of dealing with the underlying problem. Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 20:09
  • @Kris: Except in speech it isn't the “re” part that's pronounced differently nor is the timing necessarily different; it's the pronunciation of the “s” that makes the difference. The standard accepted English-speaker solution here isn't to write the word “resort” as “rezort”. Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 7:32

In its origin, resort comes from Old French "re-sortir" which meant "to go out again" and as a noun became "place people go for recreation". As for your question on a word meaning "to sort again", if you mean: "to sort = to arrange according to class, kind, or size; classify, there is the hyphenated form "to re-sort" which means exactly that: to sort again

RE - a prefix, occurring originally in loanwords from Latin, used with the meaning “again” or “again and again” to indicate repetition, or with the meaning “back” or “backward” to indicate withdrawal or backward motion: "regenerate; refurbish; retype; retrace; revert."

resort - noun. "A place to which people frequently or generally go for relaxation or pleasure, especially one providing rest and recreation facilities for vacationers: a popular winter resort."

Etymology - late 14c., "that to which one has recourse for aid or assistance," from Old French resort "resource, a help, an aid, a remedy," back-formation from resortir "to resort," literally "to go out again," from re- "again" (see re-) + sortir "go out" (see sortie). Meaning "place people go for recreation" is first recorded 1754. Phrase in the last resort (1670s) translates French en dernier ressort, originally of legal appeals. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=resort


You could use a synonym of sort: collate. So, to do it again, recollate.

to collect, compare carefully in order to verify, and often to integrate or arrange in order
(Source: Merriam-Webster)

  • 1
    They could just use reshuffle if a synonym would work, but they want to use sort. In some situations you must use the same root word. If a program has a sort button, you can't reshuffle by pressing it twice.
    – Carl Smith
    Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 1:59
  • 1
    @CarlSmith: "shuffle" doesn't work, because it means the opposite of "sort".
    – jxh
    Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 2:17
  • 1
    Good point, I didn't think that bit through. Collate is not a perfect synonym of sort though. If you recollate, you may end up with a different collection.
    – Carl Smith
    Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 2:22
  • @CarlSmith: Both collating and sorting relies on a set of rules that governs the ordering. To get the same order, each needs to follow the same rules. The problem you bring up can happen on a subsequent sort that happens to follow reverse-ordering, for example.
    – jxh
    Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 2:28
  • 1
    Not really. If I collate a list of kung fu movies, I may recollate it later and have different movies. If I have a collection of kung fu movies sorted alphabetically, and resort them chronologically, it's the same collection.
    – Carl Smith
    Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 2:30

You can also use resorting and resorted as they avoid the ambiguity.


The resorted list.

It looks better when resorted.

  • 2
    Not quite. One could go "resorting" like some go nightclubbing. It also is still confusable with resorting as in "He is resorting to the lowest tactic"
    – Oldcat
    Commented Oct 31, 2014 at 22:04
  • "It looks better when resorted" sounds odd to me. I can't imagine saying that. There would be no point in sorting more than once except if sorting by a different key. Depending on context I might say "it looks better when sorted" or "it looks better when sorted this way" or "it looks better when reordered." Commented Nov 1, 2014 at 11:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.