Afflict vs. Inflict

Afflict vs. Inflict Afflict vs. Inflict Afflict vs. Inflict By Guest Author Although the words afflict and inflict have similar meanings and are often used in similar ways, they are far from interchangeable in modern English usage. The OED offers the following definitions of afflict: Afflict: 1. trans. To dash down, overthrow, cast down, deject, humble, in mind, body, or estate. 2. intr. To become downcast (with trouble). 3. trans. To distress with bodily or mental suffering; to trouble grievously, torment. refl. To distress oneself, grieve. In the case of afflict the third definition is the closest to the most common use of the word. The emphasis is on the physical or psychological distress caused by whatever the affliction may be. The word afflict is most commonly used when describing an illness or condition. For example: He was severely afflicted with gout. She suffers from a terrible affliction. These sentences demonstrate an accurate use of the word as they describe a form of physical distress. Inflict is defined by the OED as follows: Inflict: 1. trans. To lay on as a stroke, blow, or wound; to impose as something that must be suffered or endured; to cause to be borne. 2. To impose something unwelcome. (Often jocular). The emphasis of the word inflict is upon the imposition, the force and the unwelcome nature with which whatever is being inflicted upon a person is being inflicted. For example: A severe punishment was inflicted on the hooligan. The teacher inflicted a thirty minute detention upon the rowdy pupil. This is an accurate use of the word as it concentrates not on the punishment and the distress it causes but the force with which the punishment was administered. It is of little surprise that these two words are so regularly confused as the OED mentions the word affliction in a further definition of the word inflict as follows: With inverted construction: To afflict, assail, trouble (a person) with something painful or disagreeable. An additional note added to this strand of the definition explains that this is now a rare use of the word inflict. Traditionally the words were more interchangeable but in modern English they are clearly very separate entities. When in doubt ask yourself whether or not you are talking about something somebody is doing to another person – inflict or whether you are talking about something with which somebody is suffering and the distress it is causing them – afflict. This will enable you to use each of the words in the most commonly understood terms. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Misused Words category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:50 Incorrect Pronunciations That You Should AvoidPrecedent vs. PrecedenceConfusion of Subjective and Objective Pronouns

Critical Analysis of the Article from both POSITIVE and NEGATIVE Essay - 2

Critical Analysis of the Article from both POSITIVE and NEGATIVE aspects - Essay Example The author therefore does not see products and services as two different acts but visualize it as a combination of complex processes that must be undertaken together in order to deliver something of value to the customers. The author has also provided a visual representation of the molecular model and how it can integrate with marketing processes to provide a comprehensive view of how marketers should view services and other aspects of marketing jointly. This approach therefore provides a visual picture of the different relationships and proportions of the elements. Further, author has attempted to consider services with evidence as it is the evidence only which can effectively provide a comprehensive understanding of how one can actually measure the effectiveness of the services. The author therefore provides modeling as well as blueprinting as two important methods that can effectively provide marketers an opportunity to design services in such a manner that it can offer relatively better opportunity to understanding marketing in larger context and design the overall offering in such a manner that achieve the objectives. It is however, critical to note that the author has fall short on different occasions. Services essentially are of perishable nature therefore effectively they cannot be dynamic as assumed by the author. The dynamic nature of the services can only be assumed when they are provided on the consistent basis and the customers have the ability and opportunity to provide effective feedback about the overall quality of the services. Further, services can be separated from the products as it depends upon the overall nature of the offering made by the firm. Since some products are delivered with minimal service promise therefore services essentially cannot be considered as important for designing an effective product. Lastly, the overall argument is not