Is there a term for a word that's the result of inefficient application of modifiers?
I would guess that "burglarized" is formed by this evolutionary chain:
A1) burgle
A2) buglar : someone who burgles
A3) burglarized : an object which has been acted upon by a burglar
But I would think a more canonical chain is:
B1) burgle
B2) burgled : an object of burgling
A3 and B2 seem to mean the same thing, so I would think B2 is preferable because both the word itself, and the chain of applied modifications, are shorter.
If anything it reminds me of the criticism of F.R Leavis who often railed against a tendency of making English more Germanic and thus less elegant, often in pursuit of filling one's writings with a professional jargon that would sound more intelligent and devoid of energy.
This is a guess, but I think “burglarize” is a back formation coming from “burglarization”, the state of having been burgled or an instance of same. “Burglarization” is, naively but grammatically, caused by someone or something that “burglarizes”.
It’s similar to “orientate“ instead of “orient”. An object or person has an “orientation” produced by someone or something that “orientates”. This in contrast to someone or something that “orients”.
It’s ugly English, for sure, but I believe it’s perfectly cromulent in grammatical terms.
Is there a term for a word that's the result of inefficient application of modifiers?
I would guess that "burglarized" is formed by this evolutionary chain:
A1) burgle
A2) buglar : someone who burgles
A3) burglarized : an object which has been acted upon by a burglar
But I would think a more canonical chain is:
B1) burgle
B2) burgled : an object of burgling
A3 and B2 seem to mean the same thing, so I would think B2 is preferable because both the word itself, and the chain of applied modifications, are shorter.