Are these verb phrases ('to give effect...', to + verb + into + effect) containing 'effect' prolix and tortuous? Why not simply use 'to effect'? They transpire to suggest that there may be differences?
I originally asked the above. User FumbleFingers kindly replied:
You give effect to X when X is something that already "exists", but hasn't YET been "activated" so it will actually do whatever it's intended to do (such as a plan that hasn't been put into practice yet). Often when you effect X, you cause X (which didn't previously "exist") to come into being. The idea that all "longer" phrasings are prolix, tortuous or otherwise "undesirable" is a serious misconception.
I accept this, but am still confused about the other case where X already exists. User StoneyB answered:
To give effect to something or put it into effect is to cause that something to become capable of producing effects.
But how does this differ from effect? To use StoneyB's example, If I effect a change in my lifestyle, then this change itself can 'cause [that something] to become capable of producing [further] effects'?