Avert vs. Avoid

Avert vs. Avoid Avert vs. Avoid Avert vs. Avoid By Mark Nichol What’s the difference between avert and avoid? They share a primary meaning (with a subtle but significant distinction) but despite their structural similarity are etymologically unrelated. This post discusses their senses and origins and those of similar-looking synonyms. Avert derives from the Latin verb vertere, which means â€Å"turn.† To avert is literally to turn away; one averts one’s eyes or gaze when one turns away, so as not to make eye contact or see something. But avert also means â€Å"prevent† or â€Å"ward off,† a sense it shares with avoid. However, while avert implies active effort to stop something from happening, avoid often suggests keeping away from or refraining from something rather than preventive action. One averts disaster by doing something to stop it, while one avoids it by removing oneself from a situation that will result in disaster. Aversion, originally the noun form of avert, still alludes to the physical act of turning away in its modern senses of â€Å"dislike† or â€Å"repugnance†; more rarely, it refers to an object of antipathy. Avoid stems from the Latin verb vuider, which means â€Å"empty† and is also the origin of void, which as a verb means â€Å"empty† and as a noun means â€Å"emptiness.† The a is a vestige of the Latin prefix ex-, in this sense meaning â€Å"out†; the prefix, slightly altered in the Old French word esvuider, ended up in Anglo-French as the first letter of avoider, from which the English word avoid is derived. (Devoid, meaning â€Å"without,† also has the root word void.) Something is said to be avoidable, and an act or practice of avoiding is avoidance. Another word that appears to be related to avert and avoid is evade, which means â€Å"avoid† or â€Å"escape† but its origin is the Latin verb vadere, meaning â€Å"go†; to evade is literally to not go. Something avoidable is also evadable, though this adjective is seldom used. The noun form is evasion. Inevitable, meaning â€Å"unable to be avoided,† is also unrelated; its antonym, evitable, is rare but also goes back hundreds of years. Their ultimate source is the Latin verb vitare, which means â€Å"shun.† In addition to being an adjective, inevitable sometimes appears as a noun, as shown in â€Å"Accept the inevitable† (meaning, â€Å"that which cannot be avoided†). 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:35 Synonyms for â€Å"Look†On Behalf Of vs. In Behalf OfEspecially vs. Specially

Organisational Politics Dissertation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 10750 words

Organisational Politics - Dissertation Example In the highly competitive environment, where every individual is concerned about job security, pursuance of self-interest has taken dominance. Managers engage in enhancing their abilities and capabilities to use power, and participate in political activities. In the process, they attempt to exercise coercion and control over their subordinates. This naturally gives rise to resistance which takes the shape of conflicts. However, according to Max Weber, organizations can achieve the coordination necessary for rational, logical and calculable action only through impersonal coercion and discipline of subordinates and clients (McNeill, 1978, p65). Pfeffer (1992, p10) contends that power and influence are social realities and in trying to ignore them, organizations lose a chance to understand these critical social processes and to train managers to cope with them. However, power has been associated with such a negative interpretation that people keep away from it for fear of getting a bad name. Politics in general is also related to negative outcomes; politics is considered to be inherently non-rational and subject to power interactions between diverse interests (Kinicki, 2008) but Vigoda (2000, p1) found weak negative relationship between perception of organizational politics and employees’ performance. ... Allen et al (1978, p78) emphasize that managers must know of the political processes and elaborate on the proactive and reactive behavior of the managers. Lee (1987, p316) identifies sources of power as coalition, expertise, information, rewards, emotional ties, authority and coercion while Varman and Bhatnagar add formal authority, rules and regulations, knowledge and information, counter organizations and informal organizations. However, a person’s actual power is a function of the sources, importance and scarcity of the power available to them (Lee, 1987, p317). Farrell and Peterson (1982, p403) examine individual political behavior within an organization, which they feel has been neglected. Fleming and Spicer (2008, p302) propose that power and resistance in an organization are intertwined. Bureaucratic power is used to exercise control and this gives rise to conflicts in the organization. Thompson (1960, p390) discusses the different forms and sources of organizational co nflicts while Rubenstein (1996) differentiates between conflict management, conflict resolution and conflict settlement. To resolve conflicts power and politics are the facilitators. Most of the literature reviewed here suggests that people are rational and active in pursuit of their goals. They need to influence, they need to manipulate to accomplish goals. This would imply that using tact and manipulation is acceptable as it helps further the interest of the individual as well as of the organization. However, they are seldom conscious of the repercussions of their actions. Imbalance of power can lead to several undesirable consequences such as workplace bullying, harassment and victimization. Several authors such as