Is there any adjectival form of “Audit”?
4
I just made the mistake of using "Auditory" in the context of auditing. For example:
"We need to include that information, for auditory purposes."
After I sent my e-mail, I was embarrassed to find out that "auditory" refers to hearing.
single-word-requests word-usage adjectives
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
add a comment |
4
I just made the mistake of using "Auditory" in the context of auditing. For example:
"We need to include that information, for auditory purposes."
After I sent my e-mail, I was embarrassed to find out that "auditory" refers to hearing.
single-word-requests word-usage adjectives
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 '18 at 20:01
1
It should be noted that the derivation of "audit" is from the Latin for "to hear", so "auditory" is not technically incorrect (though it would certainly confuse many).
– Hot Licks
Sep 20 '18 at 2:27
Just use audit. For audit purposes. On a side note, I'm not sure that the comma is justified. And the hyphen in email certainly isn't.
– RegDwigнt♦
Oct 20 '18 at 4:20
add a comment |
4
4
4
1
I just made the mistake of using "Auditory" in the context of auditing. For example:
"We need to include that information, for auditory purposes."
After I sent my e-mail, I was embarrassed to find out that "auditory" refers to hearing.
single-word-requests word-usage adjectives
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
I just made the mistake of using "Auditory" in the context of auditing. For example:
"We need to include that information, for auditory purposes."
After I sent my e-mail, I was embarrassed to find out that "auditory" refers to hearing.
single-word-requests word-usage adjectives
single-word-requests word-usage adjectives
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
edited Oct 20 '18 at 5:16
Ahmed
3,65212053
3,65212053
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
asked Aug 17 '18 at 19:10
MrMusAddictMrMusAddict
271
271
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 '18 at 20:01
1
It should be noted that the derivation of "audit" is from the Latin for "to hear", so "auditory" is not technically incorrect (though it would certainly confuse many).
– Hot Licks
Sep 20 '18 at 2:27
Just use audit. For audit purposes. On a side note, I'm not sure that the comma is justified. And the hyphen in email certainly isn't.
– RegDwigнt♦
Oct 20 '18 at 4:20
add a comment |
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 '18 at 20:01
1
It should be noted that the derivation of "audit" is from the Latin for "to hear", so "auditory" is not technically incorrect (though it would certainly confuse many).
– Hot Licks
Sep 20 '18 at 2:27
Just use audit. For audit purposes. On a side note, I'm not sure that the comma is justified. And the hyphen in email certainly isn't.
– RegDwigнt♦
Oct 20 '18 at 4:20
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 '18 at 20:01
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 '18 at 20:01
1
1
It should be noted that the derivation of "audit" is from the Latin for "to hear", so "auditory" is not technically incorrect (though it would certainly confuse many).
– Hot Licks
Sep 20 '18 at 2:27
It should be noted that the derivation of "audit" is from the Latin for "to hear", so "auditory" is not technically incorrect (though it would certainly confuse many).
– Hot Licks
Sep 20 '18 at 2:27
Just use audit. For audit purposes. On a side note, I'm not sure that the comma is justified. And the hyphen in email certainly isn't.
– RegDwigнt♦
Oct 20 '18 at 4:20
Just use audit. For audit purposes. On a side note, I'm not sure that the comma is justified. And the hyphen in email certainly isn't.
– RegDwigнt♦
Oct 20 '18 at 4:20
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
1
I'm not recommending the phrasing when I say 'auditorial' works in your example sentence:
We need to include that information, for auditorial purposes.
I'm sure there are better ways to put it, depending on context and intention. For example:
- We need to audit that information.
- That information must be included for the audit.
- Etc.
From OED:
auditorial, adj.
...
2. Of or pertaining to auditors of accounts; connected with an audit.
In your example, the purposes are connected with an audit.
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
|
show 4 more comments
0
Auditing
As a Native North American English speaker I would say, "We need to include that information, for auditing purposes."
Source http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
Source -https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participle
Source - https://www.englishgrammar.org/participles/
Source - https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/present_participle.htm
"Auditing" in this case is used as a present participle. "Audited" can be used as the past participle.
For example, "Our data is stored in audited databases." And, "E & Y reviewed the auditing logs."
In my experience this usage is common in the Eastern United States.
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
1
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
1
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
1
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f460613%2fis-there-any-adjectival-form-of-audit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
1
I'm not recommending the phrasing when I say 'auditorial' works in your example sentence:
We need to include that information, for auditorial purposes.
I'm sure there are better ways to put it, depending on context and intention. For example:
- We need to audit that information.
- That information must be included for the audit.
- Etc.
From OED:
auditorial, adj.
...
2. Of or pertaining to auditors of accounts; connected with an audit.
In your example, the purposes are connected with an audit.
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
|
show 4 more comments
1
I'm not recommending the phrasing when I say 'auditorial' works in your example sentence:
We need to include that information, for auditorial purposes.
I'm sure there are better ways to put it, depending on context and intention. For example:
- We need to audit that information.
- That information must be included for the audit.
- Etc.
From OED:
auditorial, adj.
...
2. Of or pertaining to auditors of accounts; connected with an audit.
In your example, the purposes are connected with an audit.
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
|
show 4 more comments
1
1
1
I'm not recommending the phrasing when I say 'auditorial' works in your example sentence:
We need to include that information, for auditorial purposes.
I'm sure there are better ways to put it, depending on context and intention. For example:
- We need to audit that information.
- That information must be included for the audit.
- Etc.
From OED:
auditorial, adj.
...
2. Of or pertaining to auditors of accounts; connected with an audit.
In your example, the purposes are connected with an audit.
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
I'm not recommending the phrasing when I say 'auditorial' works in your example sentence:
We need to include that information, for auditorial purposes.
I'm sure there are better ways to put it, depending on context and intention. For example:
- We need to audit that information.
- That information must be included for the audit.
- Etc.
From OED:
auditorial, adj.
...
2. Of or pertaining to auditors of accounts; connected with an audit.
In your example, the purposes are connected with an audit.
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
edited 58 mins ago
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
answered Oct 20 '18 at 2:38
JELJEL
27.9k45393
27.9k45393
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
|
show 4 more comments
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
What's the point of linking to the homepage of the OED? It isn't a commonly-available reference; you may as well have left it out.
– Lordology
5 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
@Lordology, OED looks commonly available to me.
– JEL
4 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
For $90/£90...!
– Lordology
2 hours ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
While you may be able to "easily" find 7.50 a month, this isn't the ELU definition of a commonly-available reference. A C.A.R. (this is what I'll abbreviate it to) is something such as a fully-accessible web link. Most certainly not something that is paid! Some people just can't afford 7.50 a month. I think 'steal' is a very poor choice of word -- this could even be considered offensive to some people. BTW I've also been ticked off for linking the OED; I realised my mistake and deleted the post. In future, please consider linking sources that are actually CARs -- e.g. MW.
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
I couldn't add the Merriam-Webster link due to the limit, but here it is: auditorial
– Lordology
1 hour ago
|
show 4 more comments
0
Auditing
As a Native North American English speaker I would say, "We need to include that information, for auditing purposes."
Source http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
Source -https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participle
Source - https://www.englishgrammar.org/participles/
Source - https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/present_participle.htm
"Auditing" in this case is used as a present participle. "Audited" can be used as the past participle.
For example, "Our data is stored in audited databases." And, "E & Y reviewed the auditing logs."
In my experience this usage is common in the Eastern United States.
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
1
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
1
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
1
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
0
Auditing
As a Native North American English speaker I would say, "We need to include that information, for auditing purposes."
Source http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
Source -https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participle
Source - https://www.englishgrammar.org/participles/
Source - https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/present_participle.htm
"Auditing" in this case is used as a present participle. "Audited" can be used as the past participle.
For example, "Our data is stored in audited databases." And, "E & Y reviewed the auditing logs."
In my experience this usage is common in the Eastern United States.
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
1
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
1
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
1
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
0
0
0
Auditing
As a Native North American English speaker I would say, "We need to include that information, for auditing purposes."
Source http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
Source -https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participle
Source - https://www.englishgrammar.org/participles/
Source - https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/present_participle.htm
"Auditing" in this case is used as a present participle. "Audited" can be used as the past participle.
For example, "Our data is stored in audited databases." And, "E & Y reviewed the auditing logs."
In my experience this usage is common in the Eastern United States.
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
Auditing
As a Native North American English speaker I would say, "We need to include that information, for auditing purposes."
Source http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
Source -https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participle
Source - https://www.englishgrammar.org/participles/
Source - https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/present_participle.htm
"Auditing" in this case is used as a present participle. "Audited" can be used as the past participle.
For example, "Our data is stored in audited databases." And, "E & Y reviewed the auditing logs."
In my experience this usage is common in the Eastern United States.
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
edited Aug 18 '18 at 4:28
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
answered Aug 17 '18 at 19:22
LumberjackLumberjack
4,4371234
4,4371234
1
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
1
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
1
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
1
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
1
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
1
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
1
1
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
That's a noun, not an adjective! Our purposes are more auditing than yours? Or are yours very auditing? Doesn't smell like an adjective to me: it's a noun. Not that he needs an adjective.
– tchrist♦
Aug 17 '18 at 20:09
1
1
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist However if I say "Do you require that for medical or auditing purposes?", is it the case that "medical" qualifies as an adjective, but "auditing" doesn't?
– WS2
Aug 17 '18 at 21:03
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
@tchrist I think it is technically a participle, which I believe can be used as an adjective. chompchomp.com/terms/participle.htm
– Lumberjack
Aug 17 '18 at 23:40
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
I’m sorry, but your reference is wrong. To say that “participles” can be part of multiword verbs or be nouns or be adjectives is using that word in a highly nonstandard way that runs counter to modern analysis, where by “modern” I mean anything within living memory of anyone alive today. That’s just saying that a participle is any -ing word deriving from the base form of a verb. That’s a morphological criterion, not one that describes a word’s part of speech the way verb, noun, adjective and all do. It’s no adjective because it doesn’t let you do adjective things to it, (continued)
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:23
1
1
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
One last demo that this is not an adjective here: flipping the first two words, both putative adjectives by your account, in “intensive auditing purposes”, produces “auditing intensive purposes” which means something completely different grammatically. It parses differently. Changing “great green dragon” into “green great dragon” may sound funny, but it doesn’t require a radical reassignment of parts of speech the way the other does. Hence, the first is not a pair of adjectives.
– tchrist♦
Aug 18 '18 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f460613%2fis-there-any-adjectival-form-of-audit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 '18 at 20:01
1
It should be noted that the derivation of "audit" is from the Latin for "to hear", so "auditory" is not technically incorrect (though it would certainly confuse many).
– Hot Licks
Sep 20 '18 at 2:27
Just use audit. For audit purposes. On a side note, I'm not sure that the comma is justified. And the hyphen in email certainly isn't.
– RegDwigнt♦
Oct 20 '18 at 4:20