What kind of verb should be used in order to say that something has increased or created inefficiency?
What kind of verb should be used in order to say that something has increased or created inefficiency?
Maybe generate or produce?
Edit: I'm asking this because created or increased inefficiency sound wrong to me instinctively and when I read them out loud.
verbs phrasal-verbs
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
add a comment |
What kind of verb should be used in order to say that something has increased or created inefficiency?
Maybe generate or produce?
Edit: I'm asking this because created or increased inefficiency sound wrong to me instinctively and when I read them out loud.
verbs phrasal-verbs
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
1
Could you explain what is wrong with “increased” or “created”. Otherwise it’s not clear what you are asking.
– David
Dec 17 at 19:37
Does your feeling that "created/increased" aren't the best fits here come (at least in part) from a feeling that those two are too positive/not neutral enough to use with a negative notion like "inefficiency"? If so, maybe "cause [greater] inefficiency" would be neutral/negative enough to jive better with that negative notion.
– Papa Poule
Dec 17 at 22:25
add a comment |
What kind of verb should be used in order to say that something has increased or created inefficiency?
Maybe generate or produce?
Edit: I'm asking this because created or increased inefficiency sound wrong to me instinctively and when I read them out loud.
verbs phrasal-verbs
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
What kind of verb should be used in order to say that something has increased or created inefficiency?
Maybe generate or produce?
Edit: I'm asking this because created or increased inefficiency sound wrong to me instinctively and when I read them out loud.
verbs phrasal-verbs
verbs phrasal-verbs
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
edited Dec 17 at 20:38
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
asked Dec 17 at 19:12
Allemande249
454
454
1
Could you explain what is wrong with “increased” or “created”. Otherwise it’s not clear what you are asking.
– David
Dec 17 at 19:37
Does your feeling that "created/increased" aren't the best fits here come (at least in part) from a feeling that those two are too positive/not neutral enough to use with a negative notion like "inefficiency"? If so, maybe "cause [greater] inefficiency" would be neutral/negative enough to jive better with that negative notion.
– Papa Poule
Dec 17 at 22:25
add a comment |
1
Could you explain what is wrong with “increased” or “created”. Otherwise it’s not clear what you are asking.
– David
Dec 17 at 19:37
Does your feeling that "created/increased" aren't the best fits here come (at least in part) from a feeling that those two are too positive/not neutral enough to use with a negative notion like "inefficiency"? If so, maybe "cause [greater] inefficiency" would be neutral/negative enough to jive better with that negative notion.
– Papa Poule
Dec 17 at 22:25
1
1
Could you explain what is wrong with “increased” or “created”. Otherwise it’s not clear what you are asking.
– David
Dec 17 at 19:37
Could you explain what is wrong with “increased” or “created”. Otherwise it’s not clear what you are asking.
– David
Dec 17 at 19:37
Does your feeling that "created/increased" aren't the best fits here come (at least in part) from a feeling that those two are too positive/not neutral enough to use with a negative notion like "inefficiency"? If so, maybe "cause [greater] inefficiency" would be neutral/negative enough to jive better with that negative notion.
– Papa Poule
Dec 17 at 22:25
Does your feeling that "created/increased" aren't the best fits here come (at least in part) from a feeling that those two are too positive/not neutral enough to use with a negative notion like "inefficiency"? If so, maybe "cause [greater] inefficiency" would be neutral/negative enough to jive better with that negative notion.
– Papa Poule
Dec 17 at 22:25
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
In a workplace setting saying either lowered productivity or decreased productivity would be appropriate. If the change is significant you can also use killed productivity.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Try it with other "in-" words where the "in-" means opposite.
..increased invisibility...
.. ineffectiveness ...
There's the alliteration of increased inefficiency in juxtiposition with the contrary motion of the two words, one going up while the other goes down?
It does seem a bit tortured, like it can't quite make up its mind.
"Introduced inefficiency" doesn't seem to have the same tangled feeling.
Unless you want that implied tension, I would go for the more direct: lowered efficiency.
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
As ever, more context would lead to better answers.
I don't think "increased inefficiency" is necessarily bad, though it's probably slightly worse than "decrease efficiency" in the same way that "decrease height" is better than "increase shortness."
The problem with words like create, generate, produce, or the one that leapt to my mind, introduce, is that everything is always somewhat inefficient. You can't "create inefficiency" in a process, because that would mean that in a prior state, it would have been perfectly efficient, which is not possible. To be precise, you should only talk about changing the level of efficiency.
However, any of those productive verbs could be used with the related word inefficiencies, which would be processes, or parts of processes that are inefficient. New inefficiencies can be created, generated, produced, introduced, etc.
You might want to play around with Google Ngram Viewer:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=increase+inefficiency%2Cintroduce+inefficiencies%2Ccreate+inefficiency%2Cdecrease+efficiency%2C+generate+inefficiency&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cincrease%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cintroduce%20inefficiencies%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Ccreate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdecrease%20efficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cgenerate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
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%2f477530%2fwhat-kind-of-verb-should-be-used-in-order-to-say-that-something-has-increased-or%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In a workplace setting saying either lowered productivity or decreased productivity would be appropriate. If the change is significant you can also use killed productivity.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
In a workplace setting saying either lowered productivity or decreased productivity would be appropriate. If the change is significant you can also use killed productivity.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
In a workplace setting saying either lowered productivity or decreased productivity would be appropriate. If the change is significant you can also use killed productivity.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
In a workplace setting saying either lowered productivity or decreased productivity would be appropriate. If the change is significant you can also use killed productivity.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
answered Dec 17 at 22:16
tk421
1662
1662
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
tk421 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Try it with other "in-" words where the "in-" means opposite.
..increased invisibility...
.. ineffectiveness ...
There's the alliteration of increased inefficiency in juxtiposition with the contrary motion of the two words, one going up while the other goes down?
It does seem a bit tortured, like it can't quite make up its mind.
"Introduced inefficiency" doesn't seem to have the same tangled feeling.
Unless you want that implied tension, I would go for the more direct: lowered efficiency.
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Try it with other "in-" words where the "in-" means opposite.
..increased invisibility...
.. ineffectiveness ...
There's the alliteration of increased inefficiency in juxtiposition with the contrary motion of the two words, one going up while the other goes down?
It does seem a bit tortured, like it can't quite make up its mind.
"Introduced inefficiency" doesn't seem to have the same tangled feeling.
Unless you want that implied tension, I would go for the more direct: lowered efficiency.
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Try it with other "in-" words where the "in-" means opposite.
..increased invisibility...
.. ineffectiveness ...
There's the alliteration of increased inefficiency in juxtiposition with the contrary motion of the two words, one going up while the other goes down?
It does seem a bit tortured, like it can't quite make up its mind.
"Introduced inefficiency" doesn't seem to have the same tangled feeling.
Unless you want that implied tension, I would go for the more direct: lowered efficiency.
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Try it with other "in-" words where the "in-" means opposite.
..increased invisibility...
.. ineffectiveness ...
There's the alliteration of increased inefficiency in juxtiposition with the contrary motion of the two words, one going up while the other goes down?
It does seem a bit tortured, like it can't quite make up its mind.
"Introduced inefficiency" doesn't seem to have the same tangled feeling.
Unless you want that implied tension, I would go for the more direct: lowered efficiency.
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited Dec 18 at 9:37
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
answered Dec 18 at 9:30
already puzzled
643
643
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
already puzzled is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
As ever, more context would lead to better answers.
I don't think "increased inefficiency" is necessarily bad, though it's probably slightly worse than "decrease efficiency" in the same way that "decrease height" is better than "increase shortness."
The problem with words like create, generate, produce, or the one that leapt to my mind, introduce, is that everything is always somewhat inefficient. You can't "create inefficiency" in a process, because that would mean that in a prior state, it would have been perfectly efficient, which is not possible. To be precise, you should only talk about changing the level of efficiency.
However, any of those productive verbs could be used with the related word inefficiencies, which would be processes, or parts of processes that are inefficient. New inefficiencies can be created, generated, produced, introduced, etc.
You might want to play around with Google Ngram Viewer:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=increase+inefficiency%2Cintroduce+inefficiencies%2Ccreate+inefficiency%2Cdecrease+efficiency%2C+generate+inefficiency&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cincrease%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cintroduce%20inefficiencies%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Ccreate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdecrease%20efficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cgenerate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
add a comment |
As ever, more context would lead to better answers.
I don't think "increased inefficiency" is necessarily bad, though it's probably slightly worse than "decrease efficiency" in the same way that "decrease height" is better than "increase shortness."
The problem with words like create, generate, produce, or the one that leapt to my mind, introduce, is that everything is always somewhat inefficient. You can't "create inefficiency" in a process, because that would mean that in a prior state, it would have been perfectly efficient, which is not possible. To be precise, you should only talk about changing the level of efficiency.
However, any of those productive verbs could be used with the related word inefficiencies, which would be processes, or parts of processes that are inefficient. New inefficiencies can be created, generated, produced, introduced, etc.
You might want to play around with Google Ngram Viewer:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=increase+inefficiency%2Cintroduce+inefficiencies%2Ccreate+inefficiency%2Cdecrease+efficiency%2C+generate+inefficiency&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cincrease%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cintroduce%20inefficiencies%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Ccreate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdecrease%20efficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cgenerate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
add a comment |
As ever, more context would lead to better answers.
I don't think "increased inefficiency" is necessarily bad, though it's probably slightly worse than "decrease efficiency" in the same way that "decrease height" is better than "increase shortness."
The problem with words like create, generate, produce, or the one that leapt to my mind, introduce, is that everything is always somewhat inefficient. You can't "create inefficiency" in a process, because that would mean that in a prior state, it would have been perfectly efficient, which is not possible. To be precise, you should only talk about changing the level of efficiency.
However, any of those productive verbs could be used with the related word inefficiencies, which would be processes, or parts of processes that are inefficient. New inefficiencies can be created, generated, produced, introduced, etc.
You might want to play around with Google Ngram Viewer:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=increase+inefficiency%2Cintroduce+inefficiencies%2Ccreate+inefficiency%2Cdecrease+efficiency%2C+generate+inefficiency&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cincrease%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cintroduce%20inefficiencies%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Ccreate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdecrease%20efficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cgenerate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
As ever, more context would lead to better answers.
I don't think "increased inefficiency" is necessarily bad, though it's probably slightly worse than "decrease efficiency" in the same way that "decrease height" is better than "increase shortness."
The problem with words like create, generate, produce, or the one that leapt to my mind, introduce, is that everything is always somewhat inefficient. You can't "create inefficiency" in a process, because that would mean that in a prior state, it would have been perfectly efficient, which is not possible. To be precise, you should only talk about changing the level of efficiency.
However, any of those productive verbs could be used with the related word inefficiencies, which would be processes, or parts of processes that are inefficient. New inefficiencies can be created, generated, produced, introduced, etc.
You might want to play around with Google Ngram Viewer:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=increase+inefficiency%2Cintroduce+inefficiencies%2Ccreate+inefficiency%2Cdecrease+efficiency%2C+generate+inefficiency&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cincrease%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cintroduce%20inefficiencies%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Ccreate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdecrease%20efficiency%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cgenerate%20inefficiency%3B%2Cc0
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
answered Dec 17 at 20:52
Juhasz
82315
82315
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
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%2f477530%2fwhat-kind-of-verb-should-be-used-in-order-to-say-that-something-has-increased-or%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');
});
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');
});
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');
});
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
1
Could you explain what is wrong with “increased” or “created”. Otherwise it’s not clear what you are asking.
– David
Dec 17 at 19:37
Does your feeling that "created/increased" aren't the best fits here come (at least in part) from a feeling that those two are too positive/not neutral enough to use with a negative notion like "inefficiency"? If so, maybe "cause [greater] inefficiency" would be neutral/negative enough to jive better with that negative notion.
– Papa Poule
Dec 17 at 22:25