In “The Man Who Found Forrest Fenn’s Treasure,” Daniel Barbarisi uses the word solve five times. And in four of those five instances, it’s a noun. No, really. See for yourself:
“…claiming that he had stolen the plaintiff’s solve and used it to find the chest.”
“So while he remained guarded about his solve and the location where he discovered the treasure…”
“…had located it by hacking her texts and emails and stealing her solve.”
“For my book, I’ve interviewed him about his solve…”
It’s almost as if Barbarisi isn’t aware that there’s a noun form—solution—of the verb he’s so intent on abusing. But that can’t be it, can it? I mean, he’s a grown man employed by a respected periodical. No, it has to be intentional, which makes it inexcusable.
Repeat after me: Unnecessarily nouning a verb doesn’t make you sound cool or hip or edgy or whatever it is you’re after. It makes you sound like an idiot. (Don’t let that stop you from reading the article, though. It really is quite interesting.)