This is a related question to Adjective for "containing an ellipsis" with a distinction for the act of becoming, instead of the state of being.

The provided answer suggests elliptic: pertaining to or marked by grammatical ellipsis. However, what if I'd like to emphasize the transformation into becoming elliptic? The term pertaining implies the notion of having the dots at the end (or being able to have them). I want to exclude that and indicate the adding of the dots but not having them there yet.

Would it work with ellipted? As in: I'm ellipting this text, so it's ellipted by me right now, after which it will be elliptic`?

  • "I'm using ellipsis in this text" would be more idiomatic. Commented Dec 9, 2023 at 13:56
  • It sounds like you're looking for a verb rather than an adjective? We can use ellipt as a verb if necessary. But maybe there's a better way to express what you mean. Commented Dec 10, 2023 at 14:58
  • @KateBunting Does it really exclude the option of the ellipsis being there already? Commented Dec 10, 2023 at 16:23
  • @TinfoilHat Possibly, yes. But in passive mode. Your suggestion is the first part of the example in the question. How could one go about the middle part? Commented Dec 10, 2023 at 16:25
  • There's ellipsis ("marked by" dots) and there's ellipsis ("pertaining to" omission). You don't have to mark your omission with dots. Does that help with your understanding? Commented Dec 10, 2023 at 17:33

1 Answer 1


The verb "to ellipt" is not found in the SOED (Shorter Oxford Dictionary); neither does Etympnline provide an entry for it. As this verb does in fact figure in the Wiktionary, this means that it is of very recent origin and it might still be contested by some users of English (I have found it myself in a transitive passive usage, but not otherwise).

(Wiktionary) ellipt Back-formation from ellipsis. Verb

ellipt (third-person singular simple present ellipts, present participle ellipting, simple past and past participle ellipted)

(linguistics) To omit (from an utterance) by ellipsis.
• 2013, Noel Burton-Roberts, Analysing Sentences, page 210: […] a couple of further differences between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses: (1) in contrast with restrictives, the wh-phrase in non-restrictives cannot be ellipted; […]

The example in the Wiktionary entry shows that this verb has a transitive passive usage. It is very much doubtful that it should be a fully transitive verb. That is, sentences as the following would not be very idiomatic, and from my point of view, they do not seem to be quite idiomatic.

  • I am ellipting the text.

Nevertheless, the usage of this verb is seen to have sprung among linguists roughly since the 1990's, the frequency becoming important since the wake of the last century; cases of use before that are relatively rare, thus the existence of no entry in the Oxford dictionary and other sources.

to ellipt


use with personal subject pronouns There is no trace, or little trace, of this verb being used with the pronouns.

The term recognized by the SOED is not "elliptic" (term which in the SOED applies only to geometry) but "elliptical", which is also the form retained by Etymonline for the grammatical use.

I'm ellipting this text, so it's ellipted by me right now, after which it will be elliptic

I seems that a phrasing such as the following would be more usual.

  • I'm omitting this text, so it's being ellipted right now, after which it will be elliptical.

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.