[Closed] English language question?

sanctioned?

permitted is a [url= http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/permitted?s=thttp:// ]verb[/url] and so is a word

Permit is both a noun and a verb.

Permit - the piece of paper

Permit - in the sense of "to allow"

yes, but it describes the act of giving permission not the act of being given a permit which was the distinction.

Look into the history of the word. Most questions about words in this manner can be resolved easiest thinking about the history of the English language.

As a verb it is an old word. From Latin to Middle English to Modern English.

As a noun, the first apparent use was in the mid-1600's.

We get enough people complaining about turning nouns into verbs in the area of computer mediated communication (internet language) yet the English language is a living, breathing thing that changes according to the needs of the speakers. We can no longer be seen to "own" the language either, with 1.2billion speakers, 465million are native.

Two different things.
i/ A [i]permit[/i] is an item, a document. This cannot de extended or derived from.
ii/To permit is to allow. This can be extended eg permitting, permitted.
In your 2nd example, there is no such word.
Possibly 😉

Why do you need both? In both your examples you've been permitted to cycle. Do we need to know the source or reason for the permission? By extension you'd have different words for "permitted" depending on each and every reason the permission was granted. The word permited - to suggest permission granted by a permit - would be an added complication even by the standards of the English language.

So why isn't permited a word, i.e. the work has been granted a permit.

Why do you need both? In both your examples you've been permitted to cycle.

In the second, you're only permitted to cycle if you have a permit. Which is confusing, which probably answers the question as to why we don't say it.

The 2nd example suggests you need possession of a permit to cycle; this doesn't necessarily mean that you are permitted ([i]allowed to[/i] either with or without a permit) to ride in a specific place...

psling

Two different things.
i/ A permit is an item, a document. This cannot de extended or derived from.

Yes it can be. Just use it to mean such and when it takes off and enough people use it like that, it'll find it's way into the next Oxford English Dictionary. In the meantime, the speaker needs to ensure the listener understands the use of the word for communication to be said to be effectively carried out.

However, it isn't an "academic" word, or a scrabble word if the rules of the game are "proper" words. There could be as many improper words in the English language as there are proper, (over the history of the language, not just today.)

Cycling is permited (you're allowed to cycle, with a permit)

It should say 'by permit', of course.

So why isn't permited a word

The words that are words are the ones that we use. If it gets used, it's in. There are no other rules.

I suspect that people don't use 'permited' because it sounds like 'permitted' which means the opposite, almost. That would be very confusing, so we don't do it.

The two can be spoken slightly different if you try. not just vowel sound, but also the speed with which the end . "pur-mitid" "per-mit-id". http://thesaurus.com/browse/permit?s=t You can find a flash sound sample here.

Your version of 'to permit' meaning 'to grant someone a permit' is the equivalent of using 'podium' as a verb, eg 'He podiumed in his last three races.' That is to say you can't, but I am sure someone will do so anyway at some point.

I suspect long ago there were a bunch of like-minded individuals wondering where the noun "permit" came from, since no doubt it was just something that fell into common usage off the back of the verb.

"He gave me this piece of paper that permits me to ride over there"

[i]"Never seen one of them before. What is it?"
[/i]
"A permit"

😀

Is this a bit like "medalling" 🙂

Okay, 15mins work tracking down the history of the use of the word.

Wiki's dictionary breaks up the noun history further than I initially found. If it is correct, then it was first in use for giving formal permission, and then the meaning changed the next century to an object that renders something "allowed" or "legal".

From the Latin: permittere (to let through. "per" through + "mittere" to let go/ send) to the Middle English: permitten and then reducing the germanic ending to Modern English: Permit.

I'd guess here is that he leadership system of the time meant most people couldn't do anything without the express permission of their lords and masters and might personally have visited to request permission for whatever it was. So, if the first written example was found in the 16th century as it referring to an object that renders something "allowed" or "legal" then this could show a bureaucratic system with a rapidly expanding population where the lords and masters couldn't physically give express permission for each and every item before them and hired bureaucrats to do the job for them, given permission to issue "permits". The general population was still illiterate till the early to mid 1800's, so printed matter from the time period would be ruling classes, church or elite trained bureaucracy.

It should say 'by permit', of course.

Surely 'by permit' is short for 'by means of a permit'.

But then again you'd be riding by means of your bike, wouldn't you?

The sentence is passive and the omission of 'by means of' is too ambiguous for my liking.