I hear the word architect used as a verb in the technical field and now more often in other industries and groups, for example:
We need to architect a better solution to the problem.
I am interested if this is considered acceptable usage, as I see this word being used more in published technical documents (not necessarily books, but corporate publications).
I can see how a conductor can conduct, a typist can type, but can a scientist "science"? A scientist might research, analyze, and so forth, as an architect might design, create, build, etc.
Merriam-Webster defines architect as a noun, however, I have been told that other dictionaries exist that define architect as both a noun and a verb — is there a credible reference or source that authoritatively answers this question?
Best Answer
Traditionally "architect" is a noun only, but it is increasingly common to hear it used as a verb, though usually in business or technical situations where jargon is very common. Since the language is largely defined by its usage, and (as Robusto notes) nouns often become verbs and vice versa, it's hard to say that it's wrong - but many consider it poor style, and in formal writing (especially if intended for an audience unfamiliar with business-speak) it might be better to choose an alternative that conveys the required meeting - perhaps "design", or "build", or even "think of" or "solve" in the specific example you gave :-)