There's always been vernacular that doesn't follow all the proper grammatical rules, the only difference is that people of higher social standing are getting less and less ashamed to use them. Using nouns as verbs is just another way of placing emotional emphasis while softening and adding humor to the tone. Take the boomers favorite word to mock about, 'Adulting'. You could say, "I spent the day taking care of my work responsibilities and balancing this with parenting my kids while trying to find money to pay the mortgage, which is stressful to me because I was overly coddled during my upbringing, never really had to face serious responsibilities, and making the adjustment on the fly with no sympathy while being judged as lazy because of my age is rather difficult." But this would have a tone of dismal seriousness, so instead you say "Adulting is hard", expressing that entire paragraph without bringing down the tone or sounding like you're taking yourself too seriously.
This all reminds me of the Calvin and Hobbes routine about "verbing words." From way back in 1993: https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/01/25 I must admit there are certain contemporary word usages that kind of get on my nerves. Like "impact" being used to describe any non-physical effect instead of an actual, literal physical impact. Your wisdom teeth painfully jamming against your molars is an "impact." Low sales causing low profits for a company is not an "impact." And then there is this "welcome in" portmanteu of the last couple decades, that employees at trendy, upscale establishments use to greet their customers. "Welcome" always took "to" when used as a greeting, not "in." This seems like a clipped mashup of "welcome" and "come in." But again, these are just my personal hangups. Language use changes radically over time. Languages are dynamic, living and changing things, not static. They follow actual usage. If a new word is invented, or if a word is borrowed from another language, or a word comes to be used differently from the 'standard' of the time, and such usage becomes commonplace enough, then by definition it becomes part of the language. Conversely, if certain words or structures and syntax are changed or dropped from common use altogether, then those old forms are no longer part of the contemporary language. Otherwise we should all still be speaking the original English of Beowulf. "Hwæt! Wē Gār-Dena in geār-dagum þēod-cyninga þrym gefrūnon, hū þā æðelingas ellen fremedon. Oft Scyld Scēfing sceaðena þrēatum, monegum mǣgðum meodo-setla oftēah. Egsode eorlas, syððan ǣrest wearð fēasceaft funden: hē þæs frōfre gebād, wēox under wolcnum, weorð-myndum ðāh, oð þæt him ǣghwylc þāra ymb-sittendra ofer hron-rāde hȳran scolde, gomban gyldan. Þæt wæs gōd cyning!" As for "bake" and "boil" being used as nouns as brought up earlier, "clam bake" as a noun for the traditional New England food preparation and accompanying event dates back to at least 1835. Similar with "boil" being used for decades in Louisiana for a preparation of crawfish or other shellfish. Not to mention the "bring to a boil [noun]" instruction that has appeared in written recipes practically since the oceans drank Atlantis. These are not new word usages. They are old enough that if they hadn't persisted until now, they would already be considered archaic language like plenty of other words and phrases that have come and gone in the meantime. Also, I'm kind of getting deja vu here (or should I say "déjà vu?"), as if these exact words may have been discussed similarly before at some point in time, here in this very forum. Kor
And there it is. Or, there it is again. Whatever logical order that people feel is getting violated by this or that current trend of usage is itself a violation of earlier versions of the language.
Well, I've been using "learning" as a noun since I was in grade school. So, about 30 years ago, give or take a year. I would encourage people to look up slang and how it grows and develops. My wife recently sent me a list of Victorian slang which I found hilarious. English as a language is one that is adaptive and changes, rather rapidly at times. The difference between before and now is that language can now travel much further and much faster, so terms that we find odd were being used in other locales prior to our awareness of them.
I have the same issues with slang that I have with new words - whenever I’ve finally mastered the latest slang expressions they’re already outdated again (but sometimes they return, and THEN it’s my time to shine, lol)
I have a comic that is perfect for this moment but I can't find it. But, enjoy this Robot Chicken Star Wars comedy clip as Vader has an internal monologue: That was pretty wizard.
Do you mean they're saying "welcome in" instead of just "welcome," or that they're using the preposition "in" instead of "to" (e.g. "Welcome in Joe's Trendy Café")? In any case, that's not a portmanteau. A portmanteau is a word composed of two or more words or parts of words. "Skyjacking," "televangelist," "infomercial," and "emoticon" are portmanteaus (or portmanteaux).
They say "Welcome in!" as a standalone greeting phrase. Thanks for the clarification on "portmanteau." I'll quit using it incorrectly... unless my incorrect usage becomes the standard. Kor
Ranks up there with mixing up singular for plural terms, using the first syllable prefix as a word (there's a reason why the first prefix leads to subsequent ones - to differentiate)... never mind toddler slang such as "muh fam"... while nobody's perfect, I would never have otherwise expected anyone under the age of 55 to swap out "request" with "ask" either... If nothing else, anyone who is obtaining a Bachelor's degree or, better yet - higher, probably has some interesting term papers if they eschewed formal writing in favor of today's colloquialisms and slang... Yes, social media and all aren't of the same league, but that doesn't seem to matter... Or, worst case scenario, use the language that Amy Farrah-Fowler invented - if not going back to the baby babble basics of "goo goo, gaa gaa, *grunt*, *fart*"... On the flip side, anyone trying to get through the original Shakespeare has it too far in the opposite direction...
Is this rapid change and progress we're seeing due to a genuine necessity, lackadaisical indolence, and/or other factors? I'm just glad Kirk wasn't running around in 1968 saying "groovy"... something the Brady Bunch actors had to do a handful of years later and if it wasn't passe by 1968, it definitely seemed to be by 1973...
I'm not sure if that would be worse than all the legal documents that continue to use archaic formal terms that nobody ever says in real life, like "witnesseth," "hereunto," "hereinbefore" and "forthwith." Kor
Just realized that it seems like I don't recall source being used as a verb in my younger years. I actually kind of like that one lol