What do we call the type of noun following the verb "effect"?

July 20, 2015 1:14 PM

You can effect a change but you cannot effect a banana. Change and banana are both nouns; is there a specific name for the type of noun that "change" is but "banana" isn't? Or is this a case where it can't be described in the way I'm hoping. TIA!
posted by ftm to Writing & Language (25 answers total)

can effect a change but you cannot effect a banana

In this case, "effect" is mostly synonymous with make.

create a change vs. create a banana

You can create a change, but a banana isn't something you can just create at a whim.

I also suspect that change is acting as a verb in that phrase, but people more knowledgeable than me can address that.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 1:18 PM on July 20, 2015

I'm not sure if there's a particular term for it (and a quick Google does not help me ferret out an answer), but in this instance "change" is a word that can be used as both a noun and a verb. To change is to shift, alter, etcetera. To banana is... Not a real phrase. So, I think the main difference is that change is both a noun and an action/verb.
posted by Urban Winter at 1:22 PM on July 20, 2015

I think I see what you're saying, ftm. Some pairs of direct verbs and objects just don't make sense. You can't effect a banana any more than you can reenact a toothbrush or misconstrue a volcano. I don't think there's any word for this phenomenon, though, apart from "nonsense."
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:29 PM on July 20, 2015 [12 favorites]

effect - cause something to happen.

A change is something that can happen. Banana is not something that can just happen. The term you're looking for here is "verbal noun", though I suspect not all verbal nouns would fit in the blank.

There are many instances in the English language (and others) where specific words have a limited number of phrases that can come after it. A good example is "privy". You can be "privy to secret information" but you also cannot be "privy to bananas". It just doesn't make any semantic sense. This is why having machines create writings work better with n-gram analyses of existing writings, than a deep understanding of syntax.
posted by ethidda at 1:29 PM on July 20, 2015 [4 favorites]

Also, are you somehow conflating "effect" (to bring about) and "affect" (to influence, have an effect on)?

It would affect a banana to put it in the refrigerator, turning it black.

In order to effect such a change on a banana, you would have to put it in the refrigerator.
posted by janey47 at 1:32 PM on July 20, 2015 [1 favorite]

I agree that it's a verbal noun - English has a lot of these, but I was surprised to learn that it's not terribly uncommon, at least in the European languages I've studied. We're missing the cute little modifying sounds, at least most of the time, but the need to make some nouns do this is apparently widespread.

("ing" and "ly" are what I'm thinking of when I refer to modifying sounds.)
posted by SMPA at 1:40 PM on July 20, 2015

I would call "change" an abstract noun.
posted by O9scar at 1:49 PM on July 20, 2015 [1 favorite]

I don't think the difference is one of grammar, merely of meaning. You can't peel change, eat change, or make change part of a tasty dessert.
posted by Thing at 1:55 PM on July 20, 2015 [8 favorites]

This seems like a case of a phrase being grammatically correct but semantically meaningless; there's a difference between syntax (i.e., what sentences are grammatical) and semantics (i.e., how do we assign real-world meanings to utterances.) In the field of linguistics, one of the standard examples of such a phrase is Chomsky's "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously".
posted by Johnny Assay at 2:15 PM on July 20, 2015 [5 favorites]

You can effect a change but you cannot effect a banana. Change and banana are both nouns; is there a specific name for the type of noun that "change" is but "banana" isn't?

As Thing helpfully points out, you can peel a banana but you cannot peel a change. This means neither that they're syntactically different nor that there's a taxonomic category to be found, for objects of the transitive verb "peel," that's any more meaningful than "things that can be peeled," or maybe "things with skins."

"Effect" in the transitive use is uncommon to the point of being a borderline archaism these days, and outside of pretty highly literate contexts you almost always only see it as part of the fixed phrase "effect change" (you can see that people are learning this sense of "effect" as a fixed phrase from how much difficulty they have applying it to any other object or context). It means "bring about," "cause," or "accomplish," so the kind of thing it can apply to, more broadly, might be called a state of affairs (the same way the kind of thing "peel" can apply to might be called an object with a skin).
posted by RogerB at 2:42 PM on July 20, 2015 [2 favorites]

To add to the grammatical gymnastics of it all, you *could* "effect" a banana in the sense that you might want to (in some grandly artistic way) become or express or otherwise manifest a banana, or banana-ness. In the same sense that "change" can be an abstract concept, you could make your own leap of logic and imagine "banana" as an abstract concept that could be "effected."

Otherwise, I agree with everyone else in here. Language doesn't always obey rules of logic, which is why you can be "ruthless" but not "ruthful." (Unless your name is Ruth, I suppose.)
posted by Quaversalis at 2:49 PM on July 20, 2015

I think a magician could effect a banana. I am not sure one could peel change, however.
posted by nat at 3:42 PM on July 20, 2015 [1 favorite]

Language doesn't always obey rules of logic, which is why you can be "ruthless" but not "ruthful."

Alternatively, we can say that it is not a rule of logic that words which take the suffix "-less" must have a negation that takes the suffix "-ful"
posted by thelonius at 3:44 PM on July 20, 2015 [2 favorites]

I think this is an instance of collocation. There are certain words (noted above in other comments) that just don't go together.
posted by mukade at 4:02 PM on July 20, 2015 [2 favorites]

Well, "effect change" is the only real common usage I can think of where "effect" is used as a verb, so for me, I think it just boils down to "effect change" being an idiom. What else is "effected?" Nothing I can think of. Could you say a phrase like "effect global peace?" Probably, but do people actually say that? Idioms allow words and phrases to go together that normally wouldn't.

Grammatically speaking, I think "effect bananas" is probably grammatically fine, it just doesn't make sense. Like this.
posted by AppleTurnover at 4:18 PM on July 20, 2015 [2 favorites]

The phrase 'effect a traffic stop' comes up in legal writing sometimes, and 'effect a transfer' and 'effect a transaction' in financial.

Merriam-Webster also suggests 'effect a settlement' and 'effect the will of the people.'
posted by box at 4:23 PM on July 20, 2015

Yeah, IMO you're just thinking way too broadly here. "Change" is the only subject I can hear "effect" taking without it sounding awkward; "effect change" is idiomatic.
posted by threeants at 5:03 PM on July 20, 2015

Response by poster: Today I effected an improvement in my grammar knowledge :) I'm going to keep following and clicking links and favoriting but it certainly seems like most or all words that can follow effect are verbal nouns.

Going to effect my escape from the thread for now :)
posted by ftm at 5:09 PM on July 20, 2015

Wait, one more thing! Change, the way you use it here (but not always), is a mass noun, and banana is a count noun. Not quite what you asked but another way in which your examples are two different kinds of noun.
posted by clavicle at 5:57 PM on July 20, 2015

There are known limitations on verbs, including verb phrases

One example is “to pretend”
it has to be followed by an infinitive
I can pretend –
to be something
to act smart

but I cannot pretend a banana

The classic verb phrase is “wreak havoc”
the only thing that someone can wreak is havoc
havoc can only be wreaked
posted by megatherium at 8:45 PM on July 20, 2015

I'm pretty sure havoc can be effected.
posted by NMcCoy at 9:59 PM on July 20, 2015

You can also cry havoc, if you have some dogs of war handy.
posted by NMcCoy at 10:00 PM on July 20, 2015

And wreak vengeance.
posted by flabdablet at 1:04 AM on July 21, 2015

Thinking it over, I think you probably could effect a banana. Consider the following scenario involving a spoiled little brat who really likes bananas:

His shrieks were rising to an unbearable pitch until Mother effected a banana, at which point they stopped altogether.

This usage is certainly non-idiomatic and therefore surprising, which I think is why it gives the impression of ancient parental magicks.
posted by flabdablet at 1:35 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]

I think a magician could effect a banana. I am not sure one could peel change, however.

I know at least one who could probably open a quarter and effect two dimes and a nickel.
posted by Devoidoid at 10:03 AM on July 21, 2015