In yesterday’s post, I wrote about Judge Leigh Martin May had issued a ruling enjoining a SEC administrative proceeding.  Presumably, Judge May has or will issue an injunction.  This leads me to question why the verb is typically spelt “enjoin” while the noun is spelt “injunction”.  Both words share the same roots – they are formed by the Latin preposition in and the verb iungo, meaning to join or yoke.  The “em” prefix seems to have arisen as a result of the word’s journey through the French enjoign into English.

Apart from the vagaries of spelling, I find “enjoin” to be an odd word.  Sometimes, it means to order that someone do something.  For example, in Act II, scene 1 of Two Gentlemen of Verona, Valentine says to Speed: “Last night she enjoined me to write some lines to one she loves.” However, courts and lawyers often, but not always, use “enjoin” in the opposite sense – to prohibit some action or activity.

Some prospectuses are simply strange

You wouldn’t expect a prospectus to include the following:

Sean Rad, the 29-year-old co-founder and CEO of Tinder, wants me to believe he’s a “romantic”, who is “ready to settle down” and have “lots of children”. In fact, the last woman he shared a bedroom with was his mother, Fariba, when he took her to Rome recently — although he nearly fled after seeing all her make-up in the bathroom (“I have OCD”) and only changed his mind because “I felt bad. I haven’t seen her in so long and wanted to be a good son”.

Yet that was included in this free writing prospectus (FWP) filed this week by Match Group, Inc. with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  According to the FWP, the above quotation is part of an article published by the Evening Standard based on an interview of Mr. Rad, the CEO of a subsidiary of the company.  The FWP includes the entire article.  Apparently, the company filed the article as a FWP because it contained inaccurate statements not made by Mr. Rad.