Word meaning “having the power to both create and destroy something”





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}






up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I'm looking for a single word, noun or adjective, that conveys the meaning "having the power to both create and destroy" something specific. For example:




The magician seemingly had < insert word here > over rabbits, able to pull them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness




Or




The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts, they have < insert word here > over/on/with user accounts.




Some words that I've considered but don't quite fit are




  • sovereignty (too specific to politics)

  • potency (not quite right)

  • omnipotence (implies non specific power)


To clear some things up in response to comments.




  • the creation/destruction need not be physical.

  • there's no wizardry involved. Regarding the magician, think stage performer not wizard

  • the word should not be limited to power over a specific thing, e.g. sovereignty grants per to create and repeal laws, but not the power to create and destroy rabbits

  • the word should be modifiable in combination with a subject to indicate a single thing or concept to which the power applies

  • the word should not be too general, such as omnipotence meaning power over everything










share|improve this question
























  • This is quite far from the mark, but refiability (from reify) may be a slight nudge in the right direction. The ability to construct is explicit; to destroy, implicit.
    – Lawrence
    May 1 '16 at 11:05










  • For the wizzard, consider "omnipotence" or "overwhelming or full power". For the network administrator, you may use "full authority".
    – Graffito
    May 1 '16 at 11:24










  • full power, total control, would fit.
    – arrivalin
    May 1 '16 at 11:54










  • In the real, physical world, it is impossible to create or destroy matter. The laws in question are some of the most fundamental humanity currently knows of: the conversation of mass (or, equivalently and more commonly used, the conservation of energy). So the wizard's magic must be precisely in breaking or subverting these laws. So you could riff on the idea of your sorcerers being "conservity-breaking" or "non-conservative", etc. Or, you could invoke Noether's theorem relating conservation laws to symmetries, and say your magi are "time variant" (vs "time invariance").
    – Dan Bron
    May 1 '16 at 12:49












  • I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it.
    – candied_orange
    May 1 '16 at 13:21

















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I'm looking for a single word, noun or adjective, that conveys the meaning "having the power to both create and destroy" something specific. For example:




The magician seemingly had < insert word here > over rabbits, able to pull them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness




Or




The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts, they have < insert word here > over/on/with user accounts.




Some words that I've considered but don't quite fit are




  • sovereignty (too specific to politics)

  • potency (not quite right)

  • omnipotence (implies non specific power)


To clear some things up in response to comments.




  • the creation/destruction need not be physical.

  • there's no wizardry involved. Regarding the magician, think stage performer not wizard

  • the word should not be limited to power over a specific thing, e.g. sovereignty grants per to create and repeal laws, but not the power to create and destroy rabbits

  • the word should be modifiable in combination with a subject to indicate a single thing or concept to which the power applies

  • the word should not be too general, such as omnipotence meaning power over everything










share|improve this question
























  • This is quite far from the mark, but refiability (from reify) may be a slight nudge in the right direction. The ability to construct is explicit; to destroy, implicit.
    – Lawrence
    May 1 '16 at 11:05










  • For the wizzard, consider "omnipotence" or "overwhelming or full power". For the network administrator, you may use "full authority".
    – Graffito
    May 1 '16 at 11:24










  • full power, total control, would fit.
    – arrivalin
    May 1 '16 at 11:54










  • In the real, physical world, it is impossible to create or destroy matter. The laws in question are some of the most fundamental humanity currently knows of: the conversation of mass (or, equivalently and more commonly used, the conservation of energy). So the wizard's magic must be precisely in breaking or subverting these laws. So you could riff on the idea of your sorcerers being "conservity-breaking" or "non-conservative", etc. Or, you could invoke Noether's theorem relating conservation laws to symmetries, and say your magi are "time variant" (vs "time invariance").
    – Dan Bron
    May 1 '16 at 12:49












  • I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it.
    – candied_orange
    May 1 '16 at 13:21













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I'm looking for a single word, noun or adjective, that conveys the meaning "having the power to both create and destroy" something specific. For example:




The magician seemingly had < insert word here > over rabbits, able to pull them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness




Or




The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts, they have < insert word here > over/on/with user accounts.




Some words that I've considered but don't quite fit are




  • sovereignty (too specific to politics)

  • potency (not quite right)

  • omnipotence (implies non specific power)


To clear some things up in response to comments.




  • the creation/destruction need not be physical.

  • there's no wizardry involved. Regarding the magician, think stage performer not wizard

  • the word should not be limited to power over a specific thing, e.g. sovereignty grants per to create and repeal laws, but not the power to create and destroy rabbits

  • the word should be modifiable in combination with a subject to indicate a single thing or concept to which the power applies

  • the word should not be too general, such as omnipotence meaning power over everything










share|improve this question















I'm looking for a single word, noun or adjective, that conveys the meaning "having the power to both create and destroy" something specific. For example:




The magician seemingly had < insert word here > over rabbits, able to pull them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness




Or




The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts, they have < insert word here > over/on/with user accounts.




Some words that I've considered but don't quite fit are




  • sovereignty (too specific to politics)

  • potency (not quite right)

  • omnipotence (implies non specific power)


To clear some things up in response to comments.




  • the creation/destruction need not be physical.

  • there's no wizardry involved. Regarding the magician, think stage performer not wizard

  • the word should not be limited to power over a specific thing, e.g. sovereignty grants per to create and repeal laws, but not the power to create and destroy rabbits

  • the word should be modifiable in combination with a subject to indicate a single thing or concept to which the power applies

  • the word should not be too general, such as omnipotence meaning power over everything







single-word-requests






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 1 '16 at 13:41

























asked May 1 '16 at 10:30









sirlark

13016




13016












  • This is quite far from the mark, but refiability (from reify) may be a slight nudge in the right direction. The ability to construct is explicit; to destroy, implicit.
    – Lawrence
    May 1 '16 at 11:05










  • For the wizzard, consider "omnipotence" or "overwhelming or full power". For the network administrator, you may use "full authority".
    – Graffito
    May 1 '16 at 11:24










  • full power, total control, would fit.
    – arrivalin
    May 1 '16 at 11:54










  • In the real, physical world, it is impossible to create or destroy matter. The laws in question are some of the most fundamental humanity currently knows of: the conversation of mass (or, equivalently and more commonly used, the conservation of energy). So the wizard's magic must be precisely in breaking or subverting these laws. So you could riff on the idea of your sorcerers being "conservity-breaking" or "non-conservative", etc. Or, you could invoke Noether's theorem relating conservation laws to symmetries, and say your magi are "time variant" (vs "time invariance").
    – Dan Bron
    May 1 '16 at 12:49












  • I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it.
    – candied_orange
    May 1 '16 at 13:21


















  • This is quite far from the mark, but refiability (from reify) may be a slight nudge in the right direction. The ability to construct is explicit; to destroy, implicit.
    – Lawrence
    May 1 '16 at 11:05










  • For the wizzard, consider "omnipotence" or "overwhelming or full power". For the network administrator, you may use "full authority".
    – Graffito
    May 1 '16 at 11:24










  • full power, total control, would fit.
    – arrivalin
    May 1 '16 at 11:54










  • In the real, physical world, it is impossible to create or destroy matter. The laws in question are some of the most fundamental humanity currently knows of: the conversation of mass (or, equivalently and more commonly used, the conservation of energy). So the wizard's magic must be precisely in breaking or subverting these laws. So you could riff on the idea of your sorcerers being "conservity-breaking" or "non-conservative", etc. Or, you could invoke Noether's theorem relating conservation laws to symmetries, and say your magi are "time variant" (vs "time invariance").
    – Dan Bron
    May 1 '16 at 12:49












  • I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it.
    – candied_orange
    May 1 '16 at 13:21
















This is quite far from the mark, but refiability (from reify) may be a slight nudge in the right direction. The ability to construct is explicit; to destroy, implicit.
– Lawrence
May 1 '16 at 11:05




This is quite far from the mark, but refiability (from reify) may be a slight nudge in the right direction. The ability to construct is explicit; to destroy, implicit.
– Lawrence
May 1 '16 at 11:05












For the wizzard, consider "omnipotence" or "overwhelming or full power". For the network administrator, you may use "full authority".
– Graffito
May 1 '16 at 11:24




For the wizzard, consider "omnipotence" or "overwhelming or full power". For the network administrator, you may use "full authority".
– Graffito
May 1 '16 at 11:24












full power, total control, would fit.
– arrivalin
May 1 '16 at 11:54




full power, total control, would fit.
– arrivalin
May 1 '16 at 11:54












In the real, physical world, it is impossible to create or destroy matter. The laws in question are some of the most fundamental humanity currently knows of: the conversation of mass (or, equivalently and more commonly used, the conservation of energy). So the wizard's magic must be precisely in breaking or subverting these laws. So you could riff on the idea of your sorcerers being "conservity-breaking" or "non-conservative", etc. Or, you could invoke Noether's theorem relating conservation laws to symmetries, and say your magi are "time variant" (vs "time invariance").
– Dan Bron
May 1 '16 at 12:49






In the real, physical world, it is impossible to create or destroy matter. The laws in question are some of the most fundamental humanity currently knows of: the conversation of mass (or, equivalently and more commonly used, the conservation of energy). So the wizard's magic must be precisely in breaking or subverting these laws. So you could riff on the idea of your sorcerers being "conservity-breaking" or "non-conservative", etc. Or, you could invoke Noether's theorem relating conservation laws to symmetries, and say your magi are "time variant" (vs "time invariance").
– Dan Bron
May 1 '16 at 12:49














I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it.
– candied_orange
May 1 '16 at 13:21




I brought you into this world, I can take you out of it.
– candied_orange
May 1 '16 at 13:21










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










As invited:



Consider reifiability (from reify) as a nudge in the right direction:




Reify verb
Make (something abstract) more concrete or real
- ODO




The ability to construct is explicit in the term, and the ability to destroy is implicit.






share|improve this answer






























    up vote
    3
    down vote













    There is a legal sense of absolute ownership in dominion that might fit.



    "Perfect control in right of ownership. The word implies both title and possession and appears to require a complete retention of control over disposition. Title to an article of property, which arises from the power of disposition and the right of claiming it..."



    There is also an idiomatic use: gain dominion over someone or something: to achieve total authority over someone or something.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
      – sirlark
      May 1 '16 at 15:51


















    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I guess you can use omnipotent



    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/omnipotent






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
      – sirlark
      May 1 '16 at 13:31






    • 1




      Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
      – tchrist
      May 1 '16 at 14:55


















    up vote
    -1
    down vote













    Reimancy- The overarching magic school of conjuration- the ability to bring something into existance from seemingly nothing, and abjuration- the ability to make something become nothing. This looks like its creating or destroying a thing, but its merely moving it somewhere else in the multiverse.






    share|improve this answer





















    • -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
      – Chappo
      2 hours ago


















    up vote
    -1
    down vote














    The magician seemingly had meddle over rabbits, able to pull
    them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness.




    Or




    The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts,
    they have meddled over/on/with user accounts.




    I think the word 'meddle' is what you're looking for simply because it implies an unfinished state of being, somewhere between 'creation' and 'destruction'.






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.














    • 1




      I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
      – user888379
      2 hours ago












    • meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
      – Chappo
      2 hours ago













    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "97"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f322795%2fword-meaning-having-the-power-to-both-create-and-destroy-something%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    5 Answers
    5






    active

    oldest

    votes








    5 Answers
    5






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    As invited:



    Consider reifiability (from reify) as a nudge in the right direction:




    Reify verb
    Make (something abstract) more concrete or real
    - ODO




    The ability to construct is explicit in the term, and the ability to destroy is implicit.






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      1
      down vote



      accepted










      As invited:



      Consider reifiability (from reify) as a nudge in the right direction:




      Reify verb
      Make (something abstract) more concrete or real
      - ODO




      The ability to construct is explicit in the term, and the ability to destroy is implicit.






      share|improve this answer

























        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted






        As invited:



        Consider reifiability (from reify) as a nudge in the right direction:




        Reify verb
        Make (something abstract) more concrete or real
        - ODO




        The ability to construct is explicit in the term, and the ability to destroy is implicit.






        share|improve this answer














        As invited:



        Consider reifiability (from reify) as a nudge in the right direction:




        Reify verb
        Make (something abstract) more concrete or real
        - ODO




        The ability to construct is explicit in the term, and the ability to destroy is implicit.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:38









        Community

        1




        1










        answered May 1 '16 at 13:55









        Lawrence

        30.5k461107




        30.5k461107
























            up vote
            3
            down vote













            There is a legal sense of absolute ownership in dominion that might fit.



            "Perfect control in right of ownership. The word implies both title and possession and appears to require a complete retention of control over disposition. Title to an article of property, which arises from the power of disposition and the right of claiming it..."



            There is also an idiomatic use: gain dominion over someone or something: to achieve total authority over someone or something.






            share|improve this answer





















            • Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 15:51















            up vote
            3
            down vote













            There is a legal sense of absolute ownership in dominion that might fit.



            "Perfect control in right of ownership. The word implies both title and possession and appears to require a complete retention of control over disposition. Title to an article of property, which arises from the power of disposition and the right of claiming it..."



            There is also an idiomatic use: gain dominion over someone or something: to achieve total authority over someone or something.






            share|improve this answer





















            • Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 15:51













            up vote
            3
            down vote










            up vote
            3
            down vote









            There is a legal sense of absolute ownership in dominion that might fit.



            "Perfect control in right of ownership. The word implies both title and possession and appears to require a complete retention of control over disposition. Title to an article of property, which arises from the power of disposition and the right of claiming it..."



            There is also an idiomatic use: gain dominion over someone or something: to achieve total authority over someone or something.






            share|improve this answer












            There is a legal sense of absolute ownership in dominion that might fit.



            "Perfect control in right of ownership. The word implies both title and possession and appears to require a complete retention of control over disposition. Title to an article of property, which arises from the power of disposition and the right of claiming it..."



            There is also an idiomatic use: gain dominion over someone or something: to achieve total authority over someone or something.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered May 1 '16 at 14:16









            Icy

            1,671511




            1,671511












            • Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 15:51


















            • Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 15:51
















            Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
            – sirlark
            May 1 '16 at 15:51




            Nice, but also implies more control than I intend
            – sirlark
            May 1 '16 at 15:51










            up vote
            0
            down vote













            I guess you can use omnipotent



            http://www.dictionary.com/browse/omnipotent






            share|improve this answer

















            • 1




              Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 13:31






            • 1




              Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
              – tchrist
              May 1 '16 at 14:55















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            I guess you can use omnipotent



            http://www.dictionary.com/browse/omnipotent






            share|improve this answer

















            • 1




              Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 13:31






            • 1




              Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
              – tchrist
              May 1 '16 at 14:55













            up vote
            0
            down vote










            up vote
            0
            down vote









            I guess you can use omnipotent



            http://www.dictionary.com/browse/omnipotent






            share|improve this answer












            I guess you can use omnipotent



            http://www.dictionary.com/browse/omnipotent







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered May 1 '16 at 11:55









            Andrew Symonds

            11




            11








            • 1




              Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 13:31






            • 1




              Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
              – tchrist
              May 1 '16 at 14:55














            • 1




              Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
              – sirlark
              May 1 '16 at 13:31






            • 1




              Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
              – tchrist
              May 1 '16 at 14:55








            1




            1




            Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
            – sirlark
            May 1 '16 at 13:31




            Thanks, I considered that, and have updated the question accordingly. I'm looking for something without the connotation of power over everything. Also, the ability to create and/or destroy does not imply the ability to control, which omnipotence does
            – sirlark
            May 1 '16 at 13:31




            1




            1




            Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
            – tchrist
            May 1 '16 at 14:55




            Please explain why you feel this answers the question.
            – tchrist
            May 1 '16 at 14:55










            up vote
            -1
            down vote













            Reimancy- The overarching magic school of conjuration- the ability to bring something into existance from seemingly nothing, and abjuration- the ability to make something become nothing. This looks like its creating or destroying a thing, but its merely moving it somewhere else in the multiverse.






            share|improve this answer





















            • -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago















            up vote
            -1
            down vote













            Reimancy- The overarching magic school of conjuration- the ability to bring something into existance from seemingly nothing, and abjuration- the ability to make something become nothing. This looks like its creating or destroying a thing, but its merely moving it somewhere else in the multiverse.






            share|improve this answer





















            • -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago













            up vote
            -1
            down vote










            up vote
            -1
            down vote









            Reimancy- The overarching magic school of conjuration- the ability to bring something into existance from seemingly nothing, and abjuration- the ability to make something become nothing. This looks like its creating or destroying a thing, but its merely moving it somewhere else in the multiverse.






            share|improve this answer












            Reimancy- The overarching magic school of conjuration- the ability to bring something into existance from seemingly nothing, and abjuration- the ability to make something become nothing. This looks like its creating or destroying a thing, but its merely moving it somewhere else in the multiverse.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Jun 15 '17 at 10:16









            Malin Miracle

            1




            1












            • -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago


















            • -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago
















            -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
            – Chappo
            2 hours ago




            -1: this answer is completely incorrect. Reimancy doesn't exist in English, it's an invented word used by a fantasy roleplaying site. Abjuration is the renunciation of something by oath: your definition is an invention.
            – Chappo
            2 hours ago










            up vote
            -1
            down vote














            The magician seemingly had meddle over rabbits, able to pull
            them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness.




            Or




            The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts,
            they have meddled over/on/with user accounts.




            I think the word 'meddle' is what you're looking for simply because it implies an unfinished state of being, somewhere between 'creation' and 'destruction'.






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.














            • 1




              I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
              – user888379
              2 hours ago












            • meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago

















            up vote
            -1
            down vote














            The magician seemingly had meddle over rabbits, able to pull
            them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness.




            Or




            The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts,
            they have meddled over/on/with user accounts.




            I think the word 'meddle' is what you're looking for simply because it implies an unfinished state of being, somewhere between 'creation' and 'destruction'.






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.














            • 1




              I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
              – user888379
              2 hours ago












            • meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago















            up vote
            -1
            down vote










            up vote
            -1
            down vote










            The magician seemingly had meddle over rabbits, able to pull
            them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness.




            Or




            The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts,
            they have meddled over/on/with user accounts.




            I think the word 'meddle' is what you're looking for simply because it implies an unfinished state of being, somewhere between 'creation' and 'destruction'.






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.










            The magician seemingly had meddle over rabbits, able to pull
            them from thin air, and equally return them to nothingness.




            Or




            The network administrator can both create and delete user accounts,
            they have meddled over/on/with user accounts.




            I think the word 'meddle' is what you're looking for simply because it implies an unfinished state of being, somewhere between 'creation' and 'destruction'.







            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 2 hours ago









            Chappo

            2,35831224




            2,35831224






            New contributor




            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            answered 2 hours ago









            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk

            11




            11




            New contributor




            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.





            New contributor





            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            Matthew Michael Hawrelluk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.








            • 1




              I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
              – user888379
              2 hours ago












            • meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago
















            • 1




              I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
              – user888379
              2 hours ago












            • meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
              – Chappo
              2 hours ago










            1




            1




            I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
            – user888379
            2 hours ago






            I've never seen "meddled" as anything but the past tense or past participle of meddle. Is it possible you're thinking of another word?
            – user888379
            2 hours ago














            meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
            – Chappo
            2 hours ago






            meddle means "interfere in something that is not one's concern", which is not the meaning the OP is looking for. Also, it's a verb - it's incorrect to say "had meddle over" (using it as a noun).
            – Chappo
            2 hours ago




















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded



















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f322795%2fword-meaning-having-the-power-to-both-create-and-destroy-something%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            What visual should I use to simply compare current year value vs last year in Power BI desktop

            Alexandru Averescu

            Trompette piccolo