Is there any adjectival form of “Audit”?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
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 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
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 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 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 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 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
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 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
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 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
edited Oct 20 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
edited Oct 20 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
edited Oct 20 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
edited Oct 20 at 5:16
Ahmed
2,91811441
2,91811441
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
asked Aug 17 at 19:10
MrMusAddict
221
221
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 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 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 at 4:20
add a comment |
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 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 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 at 4:20
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 at 20:01
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 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 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 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 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 at 4:20
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
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 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
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 at 20:09
@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 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 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 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 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
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 have that information audited.
- 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 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
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 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
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 at 20:09
@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 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 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 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 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
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 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
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 at 20:09
@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 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 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 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 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
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 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
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 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
edited Aug 18 at 4:28
answered Aug 17 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
answered Aug 17 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
answered Aug 17 at 19:22
Lumberjack
4,4071134
4,4071134
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 at 20:09
@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 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 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 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 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 at 20:09
@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 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 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 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 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 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 at 20:09
@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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 at 0:38
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
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 have that information audited.
- 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 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
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 have that information audited.
- 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 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
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 have that information audited.
- 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 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
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 have that information audited.
- 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 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
answered Oct 20 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
answered Oct 20 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
answered Oct 20 at 2:38
JEL
26.1k45190
26.1k45190
add a comment |
add a comment |
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%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');
});
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
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– tchrist♦
Aug 20 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 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 at 4:20