[milf]

I thought I had a firm grasp on the differences and when to use one over the other, but the following sentence, be it because I'm exhausted, has me a bit confused. Which is right?

Let's go to the affected|effected area to investigate.

I'm leaning towards effected, but I'm uncertain tonight and so seek a grammar guru.

[shmerek]

I would go with affected, but I gots bad grammers

[spiky_dog]

i'd use affected. google for affected area vs effected area and you'll see that the world has come to somewhat of a consensus for the prior phrase

[deej5871]

It depends on the context. In that sentence I think it could go either way, but I'm leaning toward "affected", but I wouldn't refer to myself as a "grammar guru", so, take that advice however you wish.

[milf]

Besides --because google says so-- can anyone list the grammatical reason for using affected over effected and vice versa?

[FulcrumPilot]

If I was a doc and you wanted a cure for your veneral disease I would take a look at the affected area and suggest some medicine. You will have to come back in a month for me to see whether the medicine had any effect. On second thoughts I would probably puke all over if I tried to be your doctor.

[lavar78]

"Affected" is definitely correct. You would rarely use the word "effected."

Here's a fairly good explanation.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by FulcrumPilot:
If I were a doc

Fixed.

[Rev-O]

I've always understood the difference between affect and effect to be this. Affect is an action taken to create change or influence. Effect is a result or consequence of an action being taken. Thus you can affect an effect. You can affect the outcome of a game, the effect of which is your team winning. Easy shmeasy. Affect=action. Effect=result.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Rev-O:
I've always understood the difference between affect and effect to be this. Affect is an action taken to create change or influence. Effect is a result or consequence of an action being taken. Thus you can affect an effect. You can affect the outcome of a game, the effect of which is your team winning. Easy shmeasy. Affect=action. Effect=result.

That's a bit simplistic. Generally, "affect" is usually used as a verb while "effect" is usually a noun, but they aren't restricted to those parts of speech. For instance:

So you would travel to the effected areas, or you could go to the areas you affected.

No, "affected" would be used in both cases. You can affect an area, but you can also effect change in an area.

[scottiB]

Affect = Verb
Effect = Noun

[lavar78]

Originally posted by scottiB:
Affect = Verb
Effect = Noun

That's not always true. You guys should really stop holding on to these false "rules." This is akin to "I before E except after C." It's a useful rule of thumb, but it doesn't tell the whole story.

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by Rev-O:
I've always understood the difference between affect and effect to be this. Affect is an action taken to create change or influence. Effect is a result or consequence of an action being taken. Thus you can affect an effect. You can affect the outcome of a game, the effect of which is your team winning. Easy shmeasy. Affect=action. Effect=result.

it is not so simple since effect can also be an action. have a look at the link two posts above your reply for a good explanation of the words' usages. (now i see that lavar78 has already addressed this.)

-r.

[Cubeoid]

I'm totally effected by special affects.

[Randman]

Just use impact instead for the verb.

[scottiB]

Originally posted by lavar78:
That's not always true. You guys should really stop holding on to these false "rules." This is akin to "I before E except after C." It's a useful rule of thumb, but it doesn't tell the whole story.

I couldn't post more thoroughly at the time; however, it is a useful guideline, as you've stated, and can be applied to 90+% of applications.

If I were a doc

Fixed.

Too bad the subjunctive mood is going the way of the carrier pigeon. It's a nuance in English (a language that has few, anyway) that is losing favor in the indicative world (much like passive voice). My guess is that is will be annihilated totally outside of parliamentary procedure and legal proceedings in the next twenty years.

Soon, all writing will be imperative, doodz.

[Randman]

Originally posted by scottiB:
It is too bad that the subjunctive mood is going the way of the carrier pigeon. It's a nuance in English (a language that, by the way has few nuances) that is losing favor in the indicative world (much like passive voice). My guess is that it will be annihilated outside of parliamentary procedure and legal proceedings in the next 20 years.

Fixed.

[macroy]

Originally posted by milf:
I thought I had a firm grasp on the differences and when to use one over the other, but the following sentence, be it because I'm exhausted, has me a bit confused. Which is right?

Let's go to the affected|effected area to investigate.

I'm leaning towards effected, but I'm uncertain tonight and so seek a grammar guru.

I'd have to agree with most on the effect/affect definitions. However, .... "effected" really does not look right to me in general. I don't think you'll ever use that....(is that even a word?) - To me, it may just be the incorrect usage of "affected" that's been ingrained through confusion? But like most others... grammer is definitely not something you want to ask me about.

[Randman]

Originally posted by macroy:
I'd have to agree with most on the effect/affect definitions. However, .... "effected" really does not look right to me in general. I don't think you'll ever use that....(is that even a word?) - To me, it may just be the incorrect usage of "affected" that's been ingrained through confusion? But like most others... grammer is definitely not something you want to ask me about.

Spelling either. (Ps, it's grammar). Effected is a word though you are correct in that it is rarely used these days, outside of special effects, and it causes more problems that it solves.

[Love Calm Quiet]

The online dictionary is your friend http://www.m-w.com/dictionary.htm

effect (noun): what follows a cause ("cause and effect"):

effect (but also a verb): to bring about, to accomplish, to achieve ("he managed to effect an agreement between the disputants")

affect (verb): to have an influence on; to have an effect(!) upon ("the virus had its intended effect; millions of computers were affected")

affect (noun): feeling (in a psychological sense) ("he had a flat affect, displaying little emotion")

[it can be confuseling, can't it?]

[Ghoser777]

"He managed to effect an agreement between the disputants"

He managed to affect an agreement between the disputants"

Okay, if effect and affect can be used as verbs, then which of the above is right? Or are they both right, with slightly different meanings. What I'm thinking is the first sentence means:

"He managed to make the agreement come about"

And the second means

"He had an influence on the agreement reached"

So the second is more about being part of the process while the first is about being the main ingredient in the process.

Or am I crazy?

[lavar78]

Originally posted by macroy:
I'd have to agree with most on the effect/affect definitions. However, .... "effected" really does not look right to me in general. I don't think you'll ever use that....(is that even a word?) - To me, it may just be the incorrect usage of "affected" that's been ingrained through confusion?

You're right. It's not a word. Well, it's a verb (the past tense of the verb effect), but it's not an adjective (which was the question in the original post). If you need an adjective, it is always "affected." I blame lack of sleep for missing that earlier.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Ghoser777:
Okay, if effect and affect can be used as verbs, then which of the above is right? Or are they both right, with slightly different meanings. What I'm thinking is the first sentence means:

"He managed to make the agreement come about"

And the second means

"He had an influence on the agreement reached"

So the second is more about being part of the process while the first is about being the main ingredient in the process.

Or am I crazy?

No, you're correct. That's exactly what those two sentences mean.

[scottiB]

Originally posted by Randman:
Fixed.

HA! HA! No sh!+ God what an a$$ I am!

[macroy]

Originally posted by Randman:
Spelling either. (Ps, it's grammar)...

haha.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by milf:
Let's go to the affected|effected area to investigate.

I would have said 'effected.'

You affect an effect. In other words, you affect something in the present tense, but then it becomes 'an effect' when it's already been done. 'The effected area' seems right to me because it isn't something you're doing, it's something that's already been done, like 'side effect.'

On the other hand, I think I'm wrong. A google search on "the effected area" and "the affected area" turns up a lot more finds for "affected." I guess when it's an adjective it's 'affected.'

So I guess I changed my mind and now I think it's 'affected.'

[tooki]

Consider this one fact: "affect" and "effect" have no meanings in common. There is never any case where both are correct and have the same meaning.

To affect means to influence something: "The low temperatures have affected the overall fuel efficiency of the fleet."

To effect means to execute: "The CEO effected the layoffs immediately."

I'll make this rule of thumb: "to effect" is such a rare word to the average English speaker that when in doubt, always use "to affect". And then, even when you think you need "effect", use "affect" anyway, because chances are you mean "affect".

tooki

[BRussell]

Originally posted by tooki:
Consider this one fact: "affect" and "effect" have no meanings in common. There is never any case where both are correct and have the same meaning.

To affect means to influence something: "The low temperatures have affected the overall fuel efficiency of the fleet."

To effect means to execute: "The CEO effected the layoffs immediately."

I'll make this rule of thumb: "to effect" is such a rare word to the average English speaker that when in doubt, always use "to affect". And then, even when you think you need "effect", use "affect" anyway, because chances are you mean "affect".

tooki

You're excluding the use of 'effect' as a noun though. In my experience, as someone who reads lots of college papers, people need to use 'effect' more than they do, not 'affect.'

[tooki]

Originally posted by BRussell:
I would have said 'effected.'

You affect an effect. In other words, you affect something in the present tense, but then it becomes 'an effect' when it's already been done. 'The effected area' seems right to me because it isn't something you're doing, it's something that's already been done, like 'side effect.'

On the other hand, I think I'm wrong. A google search on "the effected area" and "the affected area" turns up a lot more finds for "affected." I guess when it's an adjective it's 'affected.'

So I guess I changed my mind and now I think it's 'affected.'

Pretend you don't know the noun "effect". It doesn't mean the same thing as the verb "effect".

Affect (v) -> affected (adj): "affected" means that the referent was influenced by the actor/action.
Affect (n): no related meaning exists

Effect (v) -> effected (adj): does not exist.
Effect (n): no directly related meaning exists.


So, while the word "effect" in its various parts of speech are related historically, they have no related meanings nowadays.

Again, unless you know exactly what the verb "effect" means, I advise you avoid it, because chances are, you mean "affect".

(And yes, I did just say above that "effected" as an adjective does not exist.)

tooki

[tooki]

Originally posted by BRussell:
You're excluding the use of 'effect' as a noun though. In my experience, as someone who reads lots of college papers, people need to use 'effect' more than they do, not 'affect.'

I know this. That's why I didn't say "effect" and "affect", but "to effect" and "to affect", which are verbs plus the "to" particle. Nouns can't take the "to" particle.

Yes, you are correct that the noun "effect" is vastly more common than the noun "affect", which is a psychology term with absolutely no everyday usage.

tooki

[Synotic]

I think the best way to think of it is that affect as a verb changes an existing situation, while effect causes a new situation. If I have the right idea then that should clear up a few sentences:

Let's go to the affected|effected area to investigate.

Most likely, the area was already in existence, while some disaster (I'm assuming) affected it, or changed it. If it were effected you would have to be speaking in the context of something that caused its creation (keeping in mind that creation can be the physical creation of something or the creation of a situation, idea etc...). But right now I can't really think of a situation where that'd make sense, so I'm fairly certain that affected is the right word to use.

Originally posted by BRussell:
I would have said 'effected.'

You affect an effect. In other words, you affect something in the present tense, but then it becomes 'an effect' when it's already been done. 'The effected area' seems right to me because it isn't something you're doing, it's something that's already been done, like 'side effect.'

I don't think this is the right away to think about it. You don't affect an effect, you affect a situation or idea. Once you affect something, it's affected. Likewise, once you effect something, that something is an effect.

On the other hand, I think I'm wrong. A google search on "the effected area" and "the affected area" turns up a lot more finds for "affected." I guess when it's an adjective it's 'affected.'

So I guess I changed my mind and now I think it's 'affected.'

Keep in mind that even the media isn't exactly a perfect source to use when it comes to word choice or grammar. Doing a search for the non-existing heart wrenching finds 872 results in news.google.com while the correct heart rending only brings up 348 results.

Originally posted by Ghoser777:
"He managed to effect an agreement between the disputants"

He managed to affect an agreement between the disputants"

Okay, if effect and affect can be used as verbs, then which of the above is right? Or are they both right, with slightly different meanings. What I'm thinking is the first sentence means:

"He managed to make the agreement come about"

And the second means

"He had an influence on the agreement reached"

So the second is more about being part of the process while the first is about being the main ingredient in the process.

Or am I crazy?

Yeah, that seems to be correct. And the examples show the difference between the creation of the agreement and the affection (can I say that? ) of the agreement.

And lastly...

Originally posted by Randman:

Originally posted by scottiB:
It is too bad that the subjunctive mood It is too bad that the subjunctive mood is going the way of the carrier pigeon. It's a nuance in English (a language that, by the way has few nuances) that is losing favor in the indicative world (much like passive voice). My guess is that it will be annihilated outside of parliamentary procedure and legal proceedings in the next 20 years.

Fixed.

I normally don't do this, but since this is a grammar thread and you're correcting someone else, shouldn't the phrase by the way be separated from the main clause? A language that, by the way, has few nuances. Although, shouldn't which be used if we're using commas? But that applies to clauses, which by the way isn't. Hrm.. this is confusing... anyone?

[Ghoser777]

This is why I program - nothing but 1's and 0's, and the grammar rules are so easy to follow. I think this is the same reason I majored in math: I've always found it a universal language.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by tooki:
Consider this one fact: "affect" and "effect" have no meanings in common. There is never any case where both are correct and have the same meaning.

Well, that's not exactly true. In effect (heh), "to affect" and "to effect change" can be synonymous.

The diplomat tried to affect the situation.
The diplomat tried to effect change in the situation.

Those sentences effectively (heh) mean the same thing. Otherwise, you're right.

[buffalolee]

Affected: Because it recieved the effects.

Effect is the giver. Affect is the receiver.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Synotic:
And lastly...
Fixed.

I normally don't do this, but since this is a grammar thread and you're correcting someone else, shouldn't the phrase by the way be separated from the main clause? A language that, by the way, has few nuances. Although, shouldn't which be used if we're using commas? But that applies to clauses, which by the way isn't. Hrm.. this is confusing... anyone?

You were right at first.

A language that, by the way, has few nuances.

"Has few nuances" is integral to the phrase, so the use of "that" is correct. Using "which" requires a comma before that word (and the phrase itself must be optional).

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Synotic:
I don't think this is the right away to think about it. You don't affect an effect, you affect a situation or idea. Once you affect something, it's affected. Likewise, once you effect something, that something is an effect.

I think that the basic rule of thumb, though, is to figure out if you're talking about a noun or verb, and generally, if it's a verb, use affect, and if it's a noun, use effect. Maybe there are some exceptions, but 99% of the time you'll be OK with that in mind. That's why I say "you affect an effect."

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Ghoser777:
This is why I program - nothing but 1's and 0's, and the grammar rules are so easy to follow. I think this is the same reason I majored in math: I've always found it a universal language.

As an erstwhile engineer, I've never understood the problems technical types are supposed to have with grammar. There are a number of exceptions to the general rules, but it's more similar to math than something subjective like writing IMO.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by tooki:
I know this. That's why I didn't say "effect" and "affect", but "to effect" and "to affect", which are verbs plus the "to" particle. Nouns can't take the "to" particle.

Yes, you are correct that the noun "effect" is vastly more common than the noun "affect", which is a psychology term with absolutely no everyday usage.

tooki

The last sentence in your post made it sound like you were advocating that people need to use 'affect' rather than 'effect' more generally, as opposed to just for verbs. I agree that generally people should just use affect for verbs and effect for nouns.

[Mafia]

Originally posted by Ghoser777:
This is why I program - nothing but 1's and 0's, and the grammar rules are so easy to follow. I think this is the same reason I majored in math: I've always found it a universal language.

tru story.

[Sherwin]

Everyone else has chipped in, so here goes:

Originally posted by milf:
Let's go to the affected|effected area to investigate.

I'm leaning towards effected, but I'm uncertain tonight and so seek a grammar guru.

It should be "Let's go to the affected area". Don't ask me why. Here's a couple of other examples:

"I'm going to effect change". (effect = action verb)
"What that guy did affected this". (affect = action verb).
"That guy had an affect on this" (affect = action verb).
"Let's go to the affected area" (affected = state of being verb?).

"Effect" is a verb only as long as you're in the process of doing it. It's a noun only as long as it's describing something which embellishes (special effects are embellishments).

Or something like that.

[Synotic]

Originally posted by Sherwin:
Everyone else has chipped in, so here goes:

It should be "Let's go to the affected area". Don't ask me why. Here's a couple of other examples:

Sounds right.

"I'm going to effect change". (effect = action verb)

Looks good.

"What that guy did affected this". (affect = action verb).

That works, but "effected" would also work, if the guy's actions caused something to happen, as opposed to altering "this".

"That guy had an affect on this" (affect = action verb).

I don't believe "affect" in that sentence is a verb; it's a noun. Within the context of the sentence, I believe it's the direct object? but I could be wrong. Affect as a noun means a feeling or emotion, according to my references. Logically the only other option would be "effect", but I don't think it works in that situation. Either, "the guy affected/effected this" or "the guy caused effects". But seeing as "had an effect" is a common phrase, I'm probably missing something.

"Let's go to the affected area" (affected = state of being verb?).

The sentence is correct, but in this usage, "affected" is simply an adjective, as it modifies the noun "area".

"Effect" is a verb only as long as you're in the process of doing it.

I don't think verbs are necessarily restricted to any tense. Although there are exceptions ("I died"), "effect" isn't one of them. "I effected change", "I effect change", "I will effect change", "I will have been effecting change" etc.

It's a noun only as long as it's describing something which embellishes (special effects are embellishments).

Although I don't completely understand your reasoning, I don't think that's makes much sense� death is an effect of jumping off a cliff. For what it's worth, I'm coincidentally reading some grammar books right now, so this is a good excercise of what I'm trying to learn right now� I'm not necessarily right on any of these things.

For those who know, I recently ran into a problem where I wanted to cite sentence from the page of a website... does anyone know where I should put the period?

The lecture halls and classrooms are designed to be interactive, with more "hands-on, research-oriented activities" ("Building Philosophy").

The title of the page is "Building Philosophy"; is the period in the correct spot or should it be within the parentheses? or even within the quotation marks as well? Thanks

P.S. It looks like my excessive quoting is making my posts look longer than they really are...

[tooki]

Originally posted by lavar78:
Well, that's not exactly true. In effect (heh), "to affect" and "to effect change" can be synonymous.

The diplomat tried to affect the situation.
The diplomat tried to effect change in the situation.

Those sentences effectively (heh) mean the same thing. Otherwise, you're right.

That's nonsense. If the words cannot be exchanged 1:1, they're not the same! You had to add two words to that sentence to approximate the same meaning. They are in no way synonymous.

tooki

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Synotic:
I don't believe "affect" in that sentence is a verb; it's a noun. Within the context of the sentence, I believe it's the direct object? but I could be wrong. Affect as a noun means a feeling or emotion, according to my references. Logically the only other option would be "effect", but I don't think it works in that situation. Either, "the guy affected/effected this" or "the guy caused effects". But seeing as "had an effect" is a common phrase, I'm probably missing something.

No, you have it right. While the verb "effect" is actually useful, the noun "affect" should rarely be used (if ever). Effect is the direct object in the phrase "had an effect." You can tell it's a noun because it's preceded by an article ("an").

For those who know, I recently ran into a problem where I wanted to cite sentence from the page of a website... does anyone know where I should put the period?The title of the page is "Building Philosophy"; is the period in the correct spot or should it be within the parentheses? or even within the quotation marks as well? Thanks

AFAIK, you have it right. The period can't go inside the parentheses because it has to complete the entire sentence.

[tooki]

Originally posted by Sherwin:

1. "I'm going to effect change". (effect = action verb)
2. "What that guy did affected this". (affect = action verb).
3. "That guy had an affect on this" (affect = action verb).
4. "Let's go to the affected area" (affected = state of being verb?).

1. correct.
2. correct.
3. incorrect. "affect" in this sentence is a noun, not a verb. "Affect" as a noun is a psychology term meaning emotion. This one should read "That guy had an effect on this."
4. correct

tooki

[lavar78]

Originally posted by tooki:
That's nonsense. If the words cannot be exchanged 1:1, they're not the same! You had to add two words to that sentence to approximate the same meaning. They are in no way synonymous.

I didn't say the words are the same. I said that "to affect" and "to effect change" mean the same thing in certain instances. That's a fact.

Edit: OK, I see where you misunderstood. You're right that "affect" and "effect" never mean the same thing and aren't interchangeable. I didn't mean to imply they are.

BTW, Synotic was right when he said that "affected" in the fourth sentence is an adjective. If you really care, it's a past participle.

[The Godfather]

I have not read the whole thread but I have to say that EFFECT very common noun:

In science, there is a lot of effects such as the Hall Effect, Greenhouse Effect, Kerr's effect, Bohr's Effect.

Many science thesis are titled "The Effect of bla bla on bla bla under blablabla.

Personally, I have never read the verb EFFECT, EFFECTS or EFFECTED in any book.

P.S. English is my second language and I learned mostly from books.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Sherwin:
"That guy had an affect on this" (affect = action verb).

That sentence is wrong.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by buffalolee:
Affected: Because it recieved the effects.

Effect is the giver. Affect is the receiver.

That makes no sense.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by tooki:
Effect (v) -> effected (adj): does not exist.

(And yes, I did just say above that "effected" as an adjective does not exist.)

I doubt that.

To wit:
"John was able to effect an agreement between the two parties. Whether or not stock market developments will affect the effected agreement remains to be seen."

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I doubt that.

To wit:
"John was able to effect an agreement between the two parties. Whether or not stock market developments will affect the effected agreement remains to be seen."

Indeed. I'm slipping in my old age. It's the past participle of "effect." At any rate, it would probably be used about as rarely as the noun "affect."