Using the word discernable in a sentence

This is a discussion thread · 3 replies
Zed:
Am I using the word 'discernable' correctly here:
"the property of the fund must be identifable. If the property is mixed up with other property so that the property that makes up the fund cannot be discernible, then the creation of the fund will be invalid".

or should it be "is not discernable"? It doesn't sound quite right with "cannot be discernible" or should it be "cannot easily be discerned"? Discernible is an adjective and adjectives are used to describe nounes. My use of discernible in the sentence is on its own, should it be before the noun 'fund'?
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
CDB:
[nq:2]Am I using the word 'discernible' correctly here: "the property ... on its own, should it be before the noun 'fund'?[/nq]
In that passage, I wouldn't be afraid to repeat a useful word: "...so that the property that makes up the fund cannot be identified, then...". If you really want "discernable"*, though, you would say "is not discernable". CDB

*Both "discernable" and "discernible" are in the dictionary. I would use "discernable here, because, being a regular English derivative of "discern", it seems to me to connote "capable of being distinguished separately" more clearly than "discernible", borrowed as an adjective from Latin, which has more the flavour of "clearly visible". Others may have different opinions for you; in the end, not one person in a hundred who reads your text will find the difference discernible. CDB
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Bob Cunningham:
[nq:1]Am I using the word 'discernable' correctly here:[/nq]
First, the generally accepted spelling is "discernible". "Discernable" is shown as an alternative in a
Merriam-Webster dictionary, but the New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary* has no mention of "discernable", showing only "discernible".
[nq:1]"the property of the fund must be identifable. If the property is mixed up with other property so that the property that makes up the fund cannot be discernible, then the creation of the fund will be invalid".[/nq]
The issue is whether or not the property of the fund can be distinguished from other property, so you should probably say "cannot be distinguished" instead of "cannot be discerned".
If you want to stick with "discern-", you should say "cannot be discerned" rather than "cannot be discernible".
[nq:1]or should it be "is not discernable"?[/nq]
Yes, "is not discernible" is okay, but "is not
distinguishable" is better.
[nq:1]It doesn't sound quite right with "cannot be discernible" or should it be "cannot easily be discerned"? Discernible is an ... describe nounes. My use of discernible in the sentence is on its own, should it be before the noun 'fund'?[/nq]
Note that the antecedent of "discernible" in your passage is "property", not "fund". But, no, adjectives don't have to go before the noun they modify. You can say either "the purple cow" or "the cow is purple".
From the New Shorter Oxford :
distinguishable
1 Able to be differentiated; recognizable as different. L16.
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Live chat
Registered users can join here