An attentive friend writes:

Could you please do a post about the shocking, outrageous, and downright unacceptable use of “impacted” in last Monday’s Talk section? I’ve just got around to reading it, and it has upset me gravely:

[Link to “Moneyman,” by John Cassidy; “Greenspan himself, in a research paper that he co-wrote last year at the Fed, has pointed out how the proliferation of home-equity loans, which allow people to cash out some of the rising value of their homes, has impacted the economy.”]

And that’s not all. I myself saw an improper “hopefully” somewhere in the back of the book within the past six months. There are so rarely mistakes or syntactical errors of judgment in the magazine that when they do appear, they jump out like zombies in the dark countryside—looming, lurching, and impossible to explain.

Let’s consult our old friends William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White, who had definite views about this: “Noun used as verb. Many nouns have lately been pressed into service as verbs. Not all are bad, but all are suspect.” I quote from the newest edition of The Elements of Style, gorgeously illustrated by Maira Kalman. According to a longtime copy editor I know, the Kalman edition contains several errors. This I must see for myself, I said, so I bought it, and so far all I’ve seen are Strunk and White’s lilting sentences and a loving, mildly peevish introduction by Roger Angell. (White’s 1979 needless-word-less introduction is also here.) But I haven’t read every page; when I do, you’ll know.

Needless-word-less—hyphens, en dash, or close up? Needless-wordless? That has the wrong flavor, I think.