Can we say the second example in each of these?

He ran away.
He awayed himself by running.

They scratched off the errors.
They offed the errors by scratching.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <MikeyC>,

Actually, it's new to me.

Of course not. There's no verb to away and the verb to off means "to kill."

All you needed to do was look in a dictionary, my friend, to answer these questions.

quote:

All you needed to do was look in a dictionary, my friend, to answer these questions.

But do dictionaries contain every single item of use?

For example, I've heard "they were disappeared", in the context of Argentinian politics, but I haven't found that use in a major dictionary.

And I could have sworn I'd heard expressions such as "I'll away myself" and "Away with him!".

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <MikeyC>,

Ah, okay, so now I see you're reacting to unusual usages you've come across. It's good that you're asking about them, but it's not good to assume you can create your own verbs.

Language adapts and changes all the time, and English is certainly no exception, Mikey. In Spanish it is grammatical these days to say they were disappeared, meaning "they were made to disappear." It's a case of taking an intransitive verb and giving it a transitive verb status and usage with the passive voice. If you come across this in English, it's because the writer/speaker is mimicking the way this idea is described in current Spanish usage, but it's not technically corect English -- at least not to my knowledge. But who knows? In the future it may become acceptable just as it seems to have become acceptable in Spanish.

I've never heard I'll away myself and don't even have the foggiest idea what that means out of context. Away with him! is idiomatic, very old fashioned, and even archaic at this point. It means "Take him away!"