At first I was thinking, why not use “impacted”, it sounds a little bit awkward, but I’ve definitely seen it being used in relatively formal situations (or at least that’s what I remember).
But no, I looked it up and “impacted” should not be used in the sense of affected. TIL.
Impact, impacted, impacts are totally fine for these use cases. As a native English speaker, I’d never heard of these rules against using them that way.
But even if there is a rule, it doesn’t matter; if the terms are used this way and fully understood by both the speaker and listeners, then the rule is void.
That makes sense! I am a rule enjoyer, I guess I was responding more to the thread than to you in particular. It is good to be aware of the rules, but I also think they can sometimes hinder natural communication and create confusion.
The way I look at it, it would be better if we had a nice, consistent language with rules that make sense but… we don’t have that. English is a nonsense language with more exceptions than rules. So if I’m going to have to deal with something that doesn’t make sense in the first place, I’d rather just go with the flow. If Shakespeare can make up words, so can I.
“Impactful” is a heinous travesty of the language. I’ve actually seen “impactfulness” used too. Also bad is “impacts” … “the stock market has suffered several impacts due to low business confidence.” This cumbersome wording tries to amp up the drama. It’s much cleaner to say “The stock market has been affected by low business confidence.” Aside from the shock value of replacing “affected” with impacted, a metaphor for bodily collision, many have turned to impacted because the subtle difference between affected and effected intimidates them.
Be the better person. Avoid the hokey metaphor.
Btw, media uses “slammed” and “pounds” and other Batman words simply because they get more clicks than rebuked or chastized. Don’t be a headline writer.
At first I was thinking, why not use “impacted”, it sounds a little bit awkward, but I’ve definitely seen it being used in relatively formal situations (or at least that’s what I remember).
But no, I looked it up and “impacted” should not be used in the sense of affected. TIL.
Impact, impacted, impacts are totally fine for these use cases. As a native English speaker, I’d never heard of these rules against using them that way.
But even if there is a rule, it doesn’t matter; if the terms are used this way and fully understood by both the speaker and listeners, then the rule is void.
For sure, I am just curious. Not to lecture others, for my own knowledge. :)
I see where you are coming from, but as someone who speaks several other languages, I would say there can be benefits to lanagauge rules.
That makes sense! I am a rule enjoyer, I guess I was responding more to the thread than to you in particular. It is good to be aware of the rules, but I also think they can sometimes hinder natural communication and create confusion.
The way I look at it, it would be better if we had a nice, consistent language with rules that make sense but… we don’t have that. English is a nonsense language with more exceptions than rules. So if I’m going to have to deal with something that doesn’t make sense in the first place, I’d rather just go with the flow. If Shakespeare can make up words, so can I.
Wow, reading this has a huge impact on me…
While the definition may disagree, I would argue that language is constantly evolving, and the actual meaning of words is based on how you use them.
Where did you look it up?
Merriam-Webster defines it as:
And lists “affect” as a synonym when impact is used as a verb.
Just a quick web search; the first few results which linked to dictionary style resources.
Now I am confused. :)
If media can say “slammed” to mean “said something about”, I can use “impacted” to mean “affected”. Especially when we have the word “impactful”.
Didn’t mean to imply you can’t, I was just curious about the formal rules for the word.
And it seems “impacted” can be used in the sense of “affected”.
I am confused :)
“Impactful” is a heinous travesty of the language. I’ve actually seen “impactfulness” used too. Also bad is “impacts” … “the stock market has suffered several impacts due to low business confidence.” This cumbersome wording tries to amp up the drama. It’s much cleaner to say “The stock market has been affected by low business confidence.” Aside from the shock value of replacing “affected” with impacted, a metaphor for bodily collision, many have turned to impacted because the subtle difference between affected and effected intimidates them.
Be the better person. Avoid the hokey metaphor.
Btw, media uses “slammed” and “pounds” and other Batman words simply because they get more clicks than rebuked or chastized. Don’t be a headline writer.
Impactfullted.
“impacts” has been in my vocabulary for as long as I remember, and it’s common to use it that way. The dictionaries even have that definition.
I’m not afraid of language evolving.