Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
Are there any adjectives that work like “long†and “shortâ€, where in the lingo of Wall Streeters, they sound like transitive verb, requiring a direct object? For instance,
I am short IBM.
Buffett is long Bank of America.
Or is this just unique short-hand for where maybe an "on" or "with" is formally inserted in between ?
Interesting. "Short" is definitely a transitive verb as well as an adjective; when you're shorting Boeing, you're taking a particular action, not just being in a particular position. I don't see that with "long", though; Buffet can be long BoA, but he didn't get to that position by longing BoA...did he? If so, I've never heard that usage.
Other adjectives that have become verbs: Well, you can black someone's eye, and Jesus spoke of whited sepulchers so apparently to white something is to whitewash it, in 1610 English at least. There's the greening of America, which may not be quite the same thing. They used to speak of admirals being yellowed, which meant promoted to that rank without being given command of any squadron; that was back during the Napoleonic wars. You can brown food, I believe, when you cook it lightly, and I believe Brits sometimes say someone has been browned as a shortcut for being done brown. To a chemist, to blue something means simply to dye it blue; still, it's an adjective serving as a transitive verb. And we speak of computer controls—checkboxes and radio buttons, for example—being grayed out.
When you blind someone, you make her blind.
We can up the intensity of light or sound; does that count? I've never heard of downing it afterward, though.
I was going to say that "open" doesn't count, but the Online Etymology Dictionary says the adjective is probably older than the verb and that the verb is derived from the adjective, so it probably does count after all.
It's funny, though; I had to strain to come up with those, and although there are no doubt more that others will add, apparently adjective-to-verb happens less often than noun-to-verb, at least in English.
Oh, and although you can't cold or hot something you can warm or cool it.
RobertB said:
The way long/short are used though, notice the verb "to be" in front of them, they are used as adjective, not verb at all.
I guess language evolves to meet needs, and that can mean exceptions to rules of grammar.
An investor calls a broker and orders, "Short IBM." There is no form of the verb, "to be". "IBM" is the object, so "Short" must be the verb.
Emmett
RobertB, in the sentence "I'm short IBM" it's an adjective; you're not wrong about that. But when you go out and short even more IBM stock, that is a verb. It sounded to me as though you were saying otherwise, but maybe Emmet and I mistook you.
Here's a question: What is "IBM" in RobertB's sample sentence "I am short IBM"?
If the sense of "short" were the more traditional "I don't have enough IBM", then it's clear that there's a missing preposition; the fuller sentence would be "I am short of IBM". But that's not the meaning here, and it isn't clear to me that any preposition should be inserted. Does that make "IBM" an adverb, in this usage? Or is this perhaps a case where "IBM" is the object (so to speak) of the adjective "short"? And if so, are there any other adjectives like that (yet)?
It sounds like we have no trouble about the senses of the usages of the verb and the adjective, which, to clarify further I might point out, have very distinct practical utilities:
“I am going to short IBM†describes an action, whereas
“I am short IBM†describes the state of my portfolio after the action was taken.
The only problem, which is my subject in the first place, is the adjective appears to be followed by a direct object which is syntactically wrong. Now you explain that away by that that noun acts like an adverb, which rights the syntax, alright, but opens a new can of worms of by what tradition is a noun ever allowed to be an adverb?
I guess what happens here is Wall Streeters being super efficient as required by their profession invent their own lingo with their own syntax.
Though I have not found written examples of that adjective used in that way, they are very common coming out of those fast talking mouths.
A lot of verbs formed from adjectives are transitive and can take direct objects, including other uses of the verb to short:
He just shorted that customer. (i.e. to give less than one is entitled to; shortchange.)
She is going to short the toaster with that fork. (i.e. to cause a short-circuit.)
You are thinning the batter.
She is narrowing your options.
He is hollowing the pumpkin.
And many others.
I am thinking of the more traditional way to say this. "I am going to sell IBM short," which means I am going to sell some IBM stock before I own it, then try to buy it at a lower price than I sold it for. Stock traders have rearranged the words and left "sell" to be implied. I don't think this changes the uses of any of these words. "Sell" is still the verb, but now it is implied. "Short" is an adverb showing how it is sold. "IBM" is the object.
The command, "Short IBM" is the same. The verb "sell" is implied.
To say, "I am short IBM" is the same as saying I am inadequate on money or anything else. Only now the preposition is implied. You might say, "I am short on IBM," or you might say "I am short of IBM" and that would itself be a shortened form of saying "I am short of my need for IBM." But I think that shortening the whole thing down to, "I am short IBM" does not change the usage of any of the words. Short is an adjective and IBM is an object of an implied preposition.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)