12 ms·

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/evilness#Noun https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/evilness#Noun Can't even complain that it's a neologism and kids these days with th

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/evilness#Noun https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/evilness#Noun Can't even complain that it's a neologism and kids these days with their bad grammar; "yfelnyss" would appear to predate the Normans. Nor is "evil" in the noun sense a great synonym for "evilness" in the noun sense. "Evilness" denotes the state of being bad, while "evil" denotes the badness itself. Evilness is the correct word here. Using "evil" would have been, if we want to be really pedantic (I hope I can safely assume that we do), been mildly nonsensical.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jessaustin 5y ago
Good point! I can hardly complain of modern abuses of the language, given what the Saxons did to it. I await the seemingly inevitable "evilnessness". [EDIT:] However, I can't agree that TFA is about "the state" of feature branching, or really even that feature branching is an entity that can possess a state. According to TFA, feature branching is bad. That's an intrinsic property, not one that feature branching will be able to overcome with appropriate prayer and reflection. This is usually the case when abstract nouns are considered evil, so "evilness" is usually poor diction.
kazinator 5y ago
I'm afraid that this is simply a hypercorrection by analogy to color and such. Indeed, we could not say "the black of feature branches"; it would have to be "blackness". Something that is black (adjective-wise) doesn't "have black" (the noun); it "has blackness". The word "evil" doesn't conform to this restriction; "the evil of feature branches" is fine. Therefore "evilness" is just superfluousnessitude. The word "bad" is color-like. We need "the badness of feature branches", not "the bad of feature branches". But "evil" functions in such a way that it can substitute for "badness", and therefore for "evilness". When we say "the evil of feature branches", the grammar is very similar to "the hypocrisy of using feature branches" or "the iniquity of using feature branches" or "the stink of feature branches" and such. None of these words require an additional suffix; "stink" need not be worked into "stinkiness".
- jessaustin 5y ago
  You exhibit a more complete command of English idiom than seen elsewhere in this sub-thread. One suspects that many of the people making these sorts of mechanical arguments haven't actually done much reading in English.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jessaustin 5y ago

Good point! I can hardly complain of modern abuses of the language, given what the Saxons did to it. I await the seemingly inevitable "evilnessness". [EDIT:] However, I can't agree that TFA is about "the state" of feature branching, or really even that feature branching is an entity that can possess a state. According to TFA, feature branching is bad. That's an intrinsic property, not one that feature branching will be able to overcome with appropriate prayer and reflection. This is usually the case when abstract nouns are considered evil, so "evilness" is usually poor diction.

kazinator 5y ago

I'm afraid that this is simply a hypercorrection by analogy to color and such. Indeed, we could not say "the black of feature branches"; it would have to be "blackness". Something that is black (adjective-wise) doesn't "have black" (the noun); it "has blackness". The word "evil" doesn't conform to this restriction; "the evil of feature branches" is fine. Therefore "evilness" is just superfluousnessitude. The word "bad" is color-like. We need "the badness of feature branches", not "the bad of feature branches". But "evil" functions in such a way that it can substitute for "badness", and therefore for "evilness". When we say "the evil of feature branches", the grammar is very similar to "the hypocrisy of using feature branches" or "the iniquity of using feature branches" or "the stink of feature branches" and such. None of these words require an additional suffix; "stink" need not be worked into "stinkiness".

jessaustin 5y ago
You exhibit a more complete command of English idiom than seen elsewhere in this sub-thread. One suspects that many of the people making these sorts of mechanical arguments haven't actually done much reading in English.