Words You Would Have Thought...

Official forum of apterous.org, the website which allows you to play against other people over the Internet.
User avatar
Marc Meakin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Marc Meakin » Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:21 pm

Andrew Feist wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:
Alec Rivers wrote: lol. It seems I was being too subtle. I thought this whole conversation stemmed from my statement about Americanisms, so that's what I was alluding to. The only people I regard less cultured than us Brits are the Yanks. My resistance to them is not so much based on individual words, but on the arrogant way they think the world revolves around them, and their apparent assumption that the rest of the world wants their influence and wants to be like them, as though they have the ideal way of life. With regard to their language, I wish they would rename it 'American'.
Not all Americans are like you describe. Generalisation, especially negative, about people's personalities based on their country of origin is called... racism! So you were being racist, not subtle. Hope this is clear now.
I would have thought that racism would have been based on generalizations about ... race, not country of origin. There's not a good alternate word that I'm thinking of, though (the original meaning of chauvinism, maybe, or perhaps we can make "nationalism" work for this).

And we only think you want to be like us because we know we're the bestest country around.
I love native Americans. Edit Naive Americans. ;)
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:58 pm

Andrew Feist wrote:I would have thought that racism would have been based on generalizations about ... race, not country of origin. There's not a good alternate word that I'm thinking of, though (the original meaning of chauvinism, maybe, or perhaps we can make "nationalism" work for this).
Maybe another term would be more appropriate, but it's fundamentally the same as racism in that it discriminates against people based on some factor that they didn't choose.

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Marc Meakin » Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:12 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Andrew Feist wrote:I would have thought that racism would have been based on generalizations about ... race, not country of origin. There's not a good alternate word that I'm thinking of, though (the original meaning of chauvinism, maybe, or perhaps we can make "nationalism" work for this).
Maybe another term would be more appropriate, but it's fundamentally the same as racism in that it discriminates against people based on some factor that they didn't choose.
Stereotyping is closer.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:43 pm

Marc Meakin wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:
Andrew Feist wrote:I would have thought that racism would have been based on generalizations about ... race, not country of origin. There's not a good alternate word that I'm thinking of, though (the original meaning of chauvinism, maybe, or perhaps we can make "nationalism" work for this).
Maybe another term would be more appropriate, but it's fundamentally the same as racism in that it discriminates against people based on some factor that they didn't choose.
Stereotyping is closer.
Yep, that works.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:45 am

Charlie Reams wrote:
Andrew Feist wrote:I would have thought that racism would have been based on generalizations about ... race, not country of origin. There's not a good alternate word that I'm thinking of, though (the original meaning of chauvinism, maybe, or perhaps we can make "nationalism" work for this).
Maybe another term would be more appropriate, but it's fundamentally the same as racism in that it discriminates against people based on some factor that they didn't choose.
And when you start trying to define race it tends to all fall apart anyway. I also wonder if people would make the same "it's not racism; it's country of origin" argument if someone was rude about someone for being from India.

User avatar
John Bosley
Enthusiast
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: Huddersfield

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by John Bosley » Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:27 pm

I have cancelled this posting because .......(it had USAmerican and emaciate in the same sentence)..........

And another unconnected point - a letter in the Guardian points out that not all Amercans are from USA or even speak English.

Simon Le Fort
Rookie
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:29 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Simon Le Fort » Fri Jan 29, 2010 7:55 am

Jim's comment that EMACIATE works also adjectivally applies also to BICEP, hence that googling from professional trade journals, not blogs or tacky marketing - don't know why any such inaccuracies should clog the debate.

To keep the bodybuilding theme, DUMBBELLS are always a pair at least, but a DUMBBELL press is fine.
Charlie Reams wrote: The muscle is called the biceps (two heads).
In that case, each of the heads could be considered the singular components. The words BICEPS clearly has plurality or at least duality at its core.

Another P-final muscle/mussel lay down graciously and singularly even though clearly made up of two shells, with SCALLOP being just fine.

Disallowing BICEP is as out of touch with reality, as would be disallowing BUS in favour of OMNIBUS.
Charlie Reams wrote: .............anyone who can't deal with singular nouns that end in S is an ignoramu.
Ongoing defence of OED infallibity bears all the tunnel vision of a cyclop.

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:37 am

Simon Le Fort wrote:In that case, each of the heads could be considered the singular components. The words BICEPS clearly has plurality or at least duality at its core.
The word "duality" also has duality as its core, that doesn't tell you anything about its grammatical function. I'm confused about your point. Before you were saying that BICEP is the name of the muscle, now you're saying that BICEP should be allowed as "one end of the biceps". The latter use might well be grammatical, if it exists at all, but probably far too obscure for a dictionary of only 2000 pages.
Simon Le Fort wrote:Disallowing BICEP is as out of touch with reality, as would be disallowing BUS in favour of OMNIBUS.
You keep saying that, but you haven't produced any evidence. The ODE is a corpus-based dictionary based on statistical analysis of several orders of magnitude more text than any of us have seen in our entire lives, so I would be cautious about claiming to know better. I trawled through several pages of Google results for BICEP and all of them were from dodgy body-building websites.
Simon Le Fort wrote:Ongoing defence of OED infallibity bears all the tunnel vision of a cyclop.
You haven't read many of my posts then :| The ODE is full of strange inconsistencies and contradictions, and I've criticised it many times before. That doesn't mean they're wrong in this case.

User avatar
D Eadie
Devotee
Posts: 829
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:24 am
Location: Mars Hotel

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by D Eadie » Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:51 am

The OED does alter its stance quite a lot.

We used to disallow PINCER on the show because it was only used in combination with pincer movement. Oxford stated that PINCERS was the correct term and the singular was invalid, but nowadays this isn't the case and it's acceptable. That reminds me, where did i leave my castanets?

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Marc Meakin » Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:15 pm

I played IMBURSE recently as I assumed that to reimburse someone was to imburse them again.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 7918
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jon Corby » Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:21 pm

Marc Meakin wrote:I played IMBURSE recently as I assumed that to reimburse someone was to imburse them again.
Seems reasonable, after all you're just plenishing them again with something they already had.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:24 pm

Jon Corby wrote:
Marc Meakin wrote:I played IMBURSE recently as I assumed that to reimburse someone was to imburse them again.
Seems reasonable, after all you're just plenishing them again with something they already had.
Not to peat what has already been said, but that seems an easonable enough argument to me.

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Marc Meakin » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:11 pm

Tard.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:29 pm

Image

Turn of the Mack.

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Marc Meakin » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:33 pm

Turn to sender.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3306
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:48 pm

D Eadie wrote:where did i leave my castanets?
Is it in your trouser pocket with your scissor?
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Kirk Bevins » Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:29 pm

Ian Volante wrote:
D Eadie wrote:where did i leave my castanets?
Is it in your trouser pocket with your scissor?
I thought it was in his drawer with his tweezer - broken of course.

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:07 pm

D Eadie wrote:The OED does alter its stance quite a lot.

We used to disallow PINCER on the show because it was only used in combination with pincer movement. Oxford stated that PINCERS was the correct term and the singular was invalid, but nowadays this isn't the case and it's acceptable. That reminds me, where did i leave my castanets?
That's true, but also somewhat different since BICEPS isn't a plural noun, it's a normal noun which happens to end in an S. They have changed their mind on lots of other things, but IMO if you allow BICEP then you should allow SEPERATE and BUISNESS as well, since those are much more common errors.

User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Redcar, UK
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by JimBentley » Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:34 pm

Simon Le Fort wrote:Jim's comment that EMACIATE works also adjectivally applies also to BICEP, hence that googling from professional trade journals, not blogs or tacky marketing - don't know why any such inaccuracies should clog the debate.
No, I said that the dictionary only lists EMACIATED as an adjective. It doesn't list "emaciate" at all.

Also, all this talk about "bicep" somehow being allowable is misunderstanding the anatomy of the thing. The muscle is called the BICEPS (or biceps brachii, as I assume we're talking about the one in the upper arm, rather than the biceps femoris, which is in the thigh) but it has this name because - as Charlie said - it has two heads for its proximal attachments to the scapula. It has a single distal attachment (to the radius), but then splits into two parts (the main muscular parts of which are called bellies) and each of these has a head that attaches to a different point on the scapula. These are parts of the biceps muscle; each of them is not individually a "bicep". Hope that helps! Now let's stop this crazy talk.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:44 pm

To celebrate, I'm going to pick up some weights and do some work on my bicepses.

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Marc Meakin » Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:59 pm

Tricep ?
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:28 pm

Marc Meakin wrote:Tricep ?
Same deal.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:35 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:To celebrate, I'm going to pick up some weights and do some work on my bicepses.
Seriously. Correct?

User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Redcar, UK
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by JimBentley » Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:45 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:To celebrate, I'm going to pick up some weights and do some work on my bicepses.
Seriously. Correct?
biceps [noun] (pl. same)

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:00 pm

Some dictionaries do admit bicepses, as does CSW (the Scrabble wordlist), but not ODE.

Hugh Binnie
Enthusiast
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Hugh Binnie » Sat Jan 30, 2010 12:24 am

Surely bicipites?

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Sat Jan 30, 2010 6:48 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:
Ian Volante wrote:
D Eadie wrote:where did i leave my castanets?
Is it in your trouser pocket with your scissor?
I thought it was in his drawer with his tweezer - broken of course.
Luckily he didn't catch AID.

Hugh Binnie
Enthusiast
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Hugh Binnie » Sun Jan 31, 2010 5:56 pm

Surprised that zouave isn't valid and ZOUAVES is.

User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Redcar, UK
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by JimBentley » Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:40 pm

Hugh Binnie wrote:Surprised that zouave isn't valid and ZOUAVES is.
Plural noun, innit, like TROUSERS or CULOTTES.

David Roe
Enthusiast
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:58 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by David Roe » Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:15 pm

Just to cause confusion with the standard notation, I found out yesterday you can't have bogof, because it's actually BOGOF (abbreviation) in the dictionary. In other words, it's currently an acronym BOGOF in the dictionary so it's written bogof in Countdown, but when it becomes bogof (noun) in the dictionary, it'll be legal in Countdown and will become BOGOF.

I think.
Last edited by David Roe on Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Matthew Tassier
Acolyte
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:37 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matthew Tassier » Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:37 pm

ёж. My favourite Russian word :(
Almost took the gloss off my spectacular russian letters attack record.

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3662
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ryan Taylor » Mon Feb 15, 2010 7:33 pm

I had VIRALS disallowed. I thought VIRAL would be in the dictionary in the sense of a video or image that is passed around on the internet (like that Rick Astley one). Devastated.

Eoin Monaghan
Kiloposter
Posts: 1461
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 7:33 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Eoin Monaghan » Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:01 pm

GUILDED

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:12 pm

Eoin Monaghan wrote:GUILDED
GILDED

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:00 pm

Eoin Monaghan wrote:GUILDED
GUIDED

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3306
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante » Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:09 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote:
Eoin Monaghan wrote:GUILDED
GUIDED
GUILED
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

Miriam Nussbaum
Rookie
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:20 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Miriam Nussbaum » Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:38 am

"Reenact".

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:09 am

Miriam Nussbaum wrote:"Reenact".
All of the re-e... words are hyphenated, although I wouldn't be surprised to see that change in the new edition.

User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Adam Gillard » Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:23 am

"vocoid"

It's a phonetic term pertaining to voice. I have seen it quite a few times in written form, and I checked it up in an online dictionary. However, I don't have an up-to-date copy of the OED (and I don't know if it can be viewed online); does anyone know if this word is in there? If it isn't, I really don't see why not.
Mike Brown: "Round 12: T N R S A E I G U

C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)

Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:49 am

Adam Gillard wrote:"vocoid"

It's a phonetic term pertaining to voice. I have seen it quite a few times in written form, and I checked it up in an online dictionary. However, I don't have an up-to-date copy of the OED (and I don't know if it can be viewed online); does anyone know if this word is in there? If it isn't, I really don't see why not.
Because the ODE doesn't claim to be a list of all the words anyone has ever written down.

Shaun Hegarty
Rookie
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Shaun Hegarty » Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:56 pm


User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:07 pm

Shaun Hegarty wrote:Musicality?
Yep, that's a mistake in the extended jimdic. Has now been added.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:42 pm


User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 7918
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jon Corby » Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:54 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:BOARISH
Are you thinking of BOORISH?

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3306
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante » Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:58 pm

Jon Corby wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:BOARISH
Are you thinking of BOORISH?
That's rather piggist of you.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:14 pm

Jon Corby wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:BOARISH
Are you thinking of BOORISH?
Oh, no doubt. Whenever I've said it I've always meant 'boarish' though, rude like a pig. I must never have needed to write it down before.
The Americans have got themselves some BOARISH action, and it's only been declared by a slightly smaller number of people than have declared BOORISH so glad I'm not totally mad.

Shaun Hegarty
Rookie
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Shaun Hegarty » Sat Mar 06, 2010 6:48 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Shaun Hegarty wrote:Musicality?
Yep, that's a mistake in the extended jimdic. Has now been added.
Yay, cheers.
Shame it's not retroactive, it'd be a high score then. :D

Jennifer Bett
Newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jennifer Bett » Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:50 pm

http://www.apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=205338 round 8 - monger
http://www.apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=205323 round 1 - scaline

(I don't know how to make the URLs look pretty)

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7369
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:02 pm

Jennifer Bett wrote:http://www.apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=205338 round 8 - monger
http://www.apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=205323 round 1 - scaline

(I don't know how to make the URLs look pretty)
scaline is SCALENE, and I guess monger only goes on the end of words such as fishmonger and ironmonger, and isn't ever used to mean 'trader' in itself.

Hugh Binnie
Enthusiast
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Hugh Binnie » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:06 pm

Surprised to see no pirogis (or maybe even pirogies) given that the alternative spelling pierogi can be pluralized. (And I'm not the only one.)

User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Kirk Bevins » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:20 pm

Hugh Binnie wrote:Surprised to see no pirogis (or maybe even pirogies) given that the alternative spelling pierogi can be pluralized. (And I'm not the only one.)
pierogi is listed as a plural noun. It says (also perogi, pirogi, or pierogies)

User avatar
Alec Rivers
Devotee
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:36 pm
Location: Studio 57, Cheriton (Kent)
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Alec Rivers » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:28 pm

Jennifer Bett wrote:(I don't know how to make the URLs look pretty)
There is a simple guide here.

Hugh Binnie
Enthusiast
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Hugh Binnie » Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:54 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:pierogi is listed as a plural noun. It says (also perogi, pirogi, or pierogies)
Ah, excellent. Thanks.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Sat Mar 13, 2010 3:24 pm

Alec Rivers wrote:
Jennifer Bett wrote:(I don't know how to make the URLs look pretty)
There is a simple guide here.
Or find someone's post where they've done it, click quote and you'll see what they typed.

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3205
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Phil Reynolds » Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:39 pm

Given that pretty much every recipe involving grated lemon rind insists that the lemons be UNWAXED, you'd think the word would be in the fucking dictionary. :x

Shaun Hegarty
Rookie
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Shaun Hegarty » Sun Apr 04, 2010 2:50 am


User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Adam Gillard » Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:27 pm

*dogleg/doglegs - Term often used as a single word in golf, describing road bends etc.
Mike Brown: "Round 12: T N R S A E I G U

C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)

Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."

User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Kirk Bevins » Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:13 am

Adam Gillard wrote:*dogleg/doglegs - Term often used as a single word in golf, describing road bends etc.
It's in but hyphenated.

Liam Tiernan
Devotee
Posts: 799
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:12 pm
Location: Kildare, Rep. of Ireland

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Liam Tiernan » Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:54 pm

I've seen a similar thread before (HEPTANES/ethanes etc.), but is there any good reason why BOVINE, FELINE & EQUINE are listed as nouns as well as adjectives,(allowing BOVINES, FELINES, EQUINES as valid words) while similar words like CAPRINE, PORCINE, VULPINE etc. are not ? CANINES (teeth) and LUPINES (flowers), are understandable exceptions, but these three just seem totally arbritrary to me. Is there some rule that i'm missing?

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9377
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Charlie Reams » Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:07 pm

Liam Tiernan wrote:I've seen a similar thread before (HEPTANES/ethanes etc.), but is there any good reason why BOVINE, FELINE & EQUINE are listed as nouns as well as adjectives,(allowing BOVINES, FELINES, EQUINES as valid words) while similar words like CAPRINE, PORCINE, VULPINE etc. are not ? CANINES (teeth) and LUPINES (flowers), are understandable exceptions, but these three just seem totally arbritrary to me. Is there some rule that i'm missing?
Probably not. Statistical lexicography is often inconsistent when you slice it in a different direction, for example TRIGRAM, TETRAGRAM, PENTAGRAM but not bigram. It just depends on coincidences of usage frequency.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests