Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : From A to Zeev" -- SI Sacks Zeev -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (52)	12/31/1997 6:18:00 PM
From: Tummus1	Respond to of 708

Dear Zeev, Welcome back and here's hoping that you have a happy and prosperous New Year! TW

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (52)	12/31/1997 6:32:00 PM
From: Jack Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 708

Hi Zeev: I'll try. Your linguistic problem (as I see it)lies in confusing the properties of the verb and those of its past participle, which may be used as an adjective. The un- prefix doesn't work with many verbs (such as solicit), but the prefix does work with the past participle, which is identical to an adjective. I'll try to give some examples where it does work: Verb: see P. participle: seen Adjective use with and without -un prefix (from the Nicene Creed): "Maker ... of all that is, seen and unseen." Here, you can see(pun) that something which exits may be described (adjectival use) as "seen" or as "unseen", just as it could be described as "black, white, large, small". BUT you can't "unsee" something. This is the situation with "solicit". To make matters more complex, there are some verbs which do very well with -un in their purely verbal sense: twist and untwist, for example. You are perfectly correct that you cannot "unsolicit" something, but something (such as mail or a package)really can be described (adjective) as solicited (asked for) or unsolicited (not asked for). Hope this doesn't confuse more! Best... Jack