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
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:56 pm

audios
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

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 » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:09 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:audios
Usage example?

User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Michael Wallace » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:11 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:audios
Usage example?
Audios, amigo!

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:13 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:audios
Usage example?
Audios, amigo!
plural of audio.

Also I've put it through here :arrow:
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

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

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Eoin Monaghan » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:15 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Also I've put it through here :arrow:
I put in ENTRESOLN, and it gave a 7.

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 » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:20 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:plural of audio.
So what's the usage example? When would you use the word?

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

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Eoin Monaghan » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:21 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:plural of audio.
So what's the usage example? When would you use the word?
"Rhys thinks audios is a word, however he is wrong."

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:22 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:plural of audio.
So what's the usage example? When would you use the word?
A sound signal: lost the audios during the broadcasts.

When you're talking about a split-screen, each screen has it's own audio. Pluralise it.

"On Windows Movie Maker, what are you going to do with the audios?"
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Michael Wallace » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:23 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:plural of audio.
So what's the usage example? When would you use the word?
Hey, we're hungry why don't you go and audios some pizza!

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 » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:24 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:A sound signal: lost the audios during the broadcasts.

When you're talking about a split-screen, each screen has it's own audio. Pluralise it.

"On Windows Movie Maker, what are you going to do with the audios?"
Yeah, that seems weird to me. Each person has their own health, but you don't say "how are your family's healths?".

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:26 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:A sound signal: lost the audios during the broadcasts.

When you're talking about a split-screen, each screen has it's own audio. Pluralise it.

"On Windows Movie Maker, what are you going to do with the audios?"
Yeah, that seems weird to me. Each person has their own health, but you don't say "how are your family's healths?".
In the movie world.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

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 » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:32 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:A sound signal: lost the audios during the broadcasts.

When you're talking about a split-screen, each screen has it's own audio. Pluralise it.

"On Windows Movie Maker, what are you going to do with the audios?"
Yeah, that seems weird to me. Each person has their own health, but you don't say "how are your family's healths?".
In the movie world.
Have you worked in the movie world for long?

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:51 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:Yeah, that seems weird to me. Each person has their own health, but you don't say "how are your family's healths?".
Well of course it's ridiculous. You don't say "leafs" do you? It's "how are your family's healves?".

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:59 pm

Well I just hope AUDIOS and AUREOLING are in the OED3.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8187
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:05 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:Yeah, that seems weird to me. Each person has their own health, but you don't say "how are your family's healths?".
Well of course it's ridiculous. You don't say "leafs" do you? It's "how are your family's healves?".
Healthes

Andrew Feist
Enthusiast
Posts: 462
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:43 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Andrew Feist » Sat Oct 02, 2010 1:51 am

duplexing^, as in what the big copier at work does.

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3285
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante » Sat Oct 02, 2010 11:28 am

Andrew Feist wrote:duplexing^, as in what the big copier at work does.
Doesn't it just make duplexes by copying?
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Mon Oct 11, 2010 3:40 pm

Select one of these audios.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3285
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante » Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:48 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:Select one of these audios.
links pls
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 » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:05 pm

minused or minussed. Can't be bothered checking to see if it's been discussed before.

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Lesley Hines » Mon Oct 11, 2010 9:26 pm

sluttier! How is that not there? The Oxford lexicographers have never been to Worcester, I can tell you :lol:
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 7917
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jon Corby » Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:59 am

Rhys Benjamin wrote:Select one of these audios.
I can't see any audios to select. Did you forget to put them in?

User avatar
James Hall
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 6:26 pm
Location: Portsmouth
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by James Hall » Tue Oct 12, 2010 10:12 am

Nothings
______________
___________
________
_____
__

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Tue Oct 12, 2010 3:42 pm

Jon Corby wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:Select one of these audios.
I can't see any audios to select. Did you forget to put them in?
It was an example of audios.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

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

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Miriam Nussbaum » Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:30 am

I'm really surprised that RATIONALS^ isn't in. Like the set of rational numbers. (If it were, I would have beaten my Goatdown Letters Attack PB by 12 points!)

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 » Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:20 pm

Miriam Nussbaum wrote:I'm really surprised that RATIONALS^ isn't in. Like the set of rational numbers. (If it were, I would have beaten my Goatdown Letters Attack PB by 12 points!)
And if it were, Chris' last offered word in his heats would have been valid.

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1493
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Graeme Cole » Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:18 pm

FALSIE. Susie mentioned only the other day that FALSIES were pads for putting in bras, but apparently you can't have only one of them. What if you've got one breast smaller than the other?

And yes, RATIONALS really ought to be in the dictionary. The argument against inclusion could be that the noun is "rational number" rather than "rational", but "the rationals" is widely used to refer to the set of all rational numbers, and I'm sure I remember using it in that way at school a decade ago.

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 Oct 13, 2010 10:26 pm

Graeme Cole wrote:FALSIE. Susie mentioned only the other day that FALSIES were pads for putting in bras, but apparently you can't have only one of them. What if you've got one breast smaller than the other?

And yes, RATIONALS really ought to be in the dictionary. The argument against inclusion could be that the noun is "rational number" rather than "rational", but "the rationals" is widely used to refer to the set of all rational numbers, and I'm sure I remember using it in that way at school a decade ago.
The question in both cases is whether the words are really in common usage. In the case of rationals I feel like the answer is yes, at least as much as many of the obscure scientific terms which have made the cut, but I'd have to concede that they're the ones with the zillion-word database.

User avatar
James Hall
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 6:26 pm
Location: Portsmouth
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by James Hall » Sat Oct 16, 2010 9:46 pm

______________
___________
________
_____
__

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8187
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:15 pm

James Hall wrote:Mauves
As in: The ODE mauves in mysterious ways.

User avatar
James Hall
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 6:26 pm
Location: Portsmouth
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by James Hall » Sun Oct 17, 2010 9:13 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote:As in: The ODE mauves in mysterious ways.
Hehe nice one.

You can surely get reds and greens and things, so why not mauves?
______________
___________
________
_____
__

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

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by David Roe » Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:05 pm

James Hall wrote:You can surely get reds and greens and things, so why not mauves?
The justification Susie has given on the show is that 'primary' colours like reds and greens have various shades, while colours like mauve are a shade already and don't have sub-shades. (That's a paraphrase.)

[Edit - And I dare say reds and greens are allowable for snooker as well - "he potted three reds followed by three greens", for example.]

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:10 am

abrasions - where more than one abrasion happens.
Last edited by Rhys Benjamin on Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3285
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante » Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:50 am

Rhys Benjamin wrote:abrations - where more than one abration happens.
Might be worth investigating why abration isn't in either!
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:06 am

Ian Volante wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:abrations - where more than one abration happens.
Might be worth investigating why abration isn't in either!
it is though.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Lesley Hines » Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:46 am

Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Ian Volante wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:abrations - where more than one abration happens.
Might be worth investigating why abration isn't in either!
it is though.
It's not :? ABRASION (as in scraping) is in, although it's a mass noun and therefore not pluralised frequently enough to warrant entry into the dictionary. Abration (and any plural thereof) is a misspelling, sorry :(

I know it's bad luck (and happens to me often enough) but you'll know for next time :)
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Clive Brooker
Devotee
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:37 pm
Location: San Toy

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Clive Brooker » Sat Oct 23, 2010 4:46 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:ABRASION ... a mass noun and therefore not pluralised frequently enough to warrant entry into the dictionary
Does ABRASION really have no countable subsense in the ODE? I can't check in my ODE2r because ... it's still in its cellophane wrapper. Daft, I know.

FWIW the NODE did include the countable sense, i.e. an area damaged by scraping or wearing away. Ditto the COD until its non-appearance in the celebrated 10th edition.

Oliver Garner
Series 62 Champion
Posts: 768
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:13 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Oliver Garner » Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:34 pm

ADHAN and ADHANS, the Islamic call to prayer.

Peter Mabey
Devotee
Posts: 976
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Harlow

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Peter Mabey » Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:42 pm

Oliver Garner wrote:ADHAN and ADHANS, the Islamic call to prayer.
The usual English version is AZAN :geek:

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8187
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:21 pm

Clive Brooker wrote:I can't check in my ODE2r because ... it's still in its cellophane wrapper. Daft, I know.
You could take out your OED and your OCD in one fell swoop. ;)

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 » Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:00 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote:
Clive Brooker wrote:I can't check in my ODE2r because ... it's still in its cellophane wrapper. Daft, I know.
You could take out your OED and your OCD in one fell swoop. ;)
:lol: ** LIKE **

Jonathan Wynn
Rookie
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 8:00 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jonathan Wynn » Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:11 pm

ETIOLATED but not ETIOLATES? A mistake surely?

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 » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:05 am

Jonathan Wynn wrote:ETIOLATED but not ETIOLATES? A mistake surely?
Not really. Something can be unkempt but no one unkemps it. Adjectives don't necessarily produce verbs.

Andrew Feist
Enthusiast
Posts: 462
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:43 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Andrew Feist » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:08 am

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jonathan Wynn wrote:ETIOLATED but not ETIOLATES? A mistake surely?
Not really. Something can be unkempt but no one unkemps it. Adjectives don't necessarily produce verbs.
Don't know about the "real" dictionary; my dictionary only contains etiolate as a verb and not an adjective.

Jonathan Wynn
Rookie
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 8:00 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jonathan Wynn » Sun Oct 31, 2010 8:00 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jonathan Wynn wrote:ETIOLATED but not ETIOLATES? A mistake surely?
Not really. Something can be unkempt but no one unkemps it. Adjectives don't necessarily produce verbs.
Thanks well I guess that would make sense yeah, it's just that it appears 'Etiolate' is a verb, at least according to google, meaning to "make weak or stunt growth in a plant", or "make pale or sickly", and the example given by google even says "alcohol ETIOLATES your skin". Still, who knows, guess there must be some explanation :shock:

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

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Hugh Binnie » Sun Oct 31, 2010 10:36 pm

Andrew Feist wrote:Don't know about the "real" dictionary; my dictionary only contains etiolate as a verb and not an adjective.
3rd edition has ETIOLATED (adj.) and ETIOLATION (noun) but not etiolate^.

Thomas Cappleman
Acolyte
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:42 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Thomas Cappleman » Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:13 pm

Genocides - Armenian Genocide + Rwandan Genocide = 2 genocides

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 Nov 01, 2010 9:28 pm

Thomas Cappleman wrote:Genocides - Armenian Genocide + Rwandan Genocide = 2 genocides
Yeah, I think this is a mistake. Can someone check the definition?

User avatar
Kai Laddiman
Fanatic
Posts: 2314
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
Location: My bedroom

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Kai Laddiman » Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:34 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Thomas Cappleman wrote:Genocides - Armenian Genocide + Rwandan Genocide = 2 genocides
Yeah, I think this is a mistake. Can someone check the definition?
It's given as a mass noun. I think the fact that Genocide is capitalised in both of Thomas' examples suggests that individual acts (the countable sense) are capitalised generally.
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.

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 Nov 01, 2010 9:36 pm

Kai Laddiman wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:
Thomas Cappleman wrote:Genocides - Armenian Genocide + Rwandan Genocide = 2 genocides
Yeah, I think this is a mistake. Can someone check the definition?
It's given as a mass noun.
Yeah I know, but it seems like it should be covered by the "actions" clause (I think the example given is CIRCUMCISIONS). Depends on the wording of the definition.

User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2655
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Redcar, UK
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by JimBentley » Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:41 pm

genocide noun (mass noun) the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group.

I would say yes to the plural, for sure, it makes sense. But my record on these things is not great.

User avatar
Kai Laddiman
Fanatic
Posts: 2314
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
Location: My bedroom

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Kai Laddiman » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:11 pm

Oh yeh, sorry, completely forgot about this.
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.

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 Nov 01, 2010 10:24 pm

Good call, Thomas. Post this in the "Countmax errors" thread and I'll eventually fix it maybe perhaps.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8187
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:31 pm

I'm surprised LIGHTBULB isn't there. There must be a joke there somewhere.

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 Nov 02, 2010 12:15 am

Gavin Chipper wrote:I'm surprised LIGHTBULB isn't there.
What did it look like when you realised?

User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ben Hunter » Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:30 am

Charlie Reams wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:I'm surprised LIGHTBULB isn't there.
What did it look like when you realised?
like

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1894
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Thu Nov 04, 2010 6:05 pm

Plaices...

you know those fish...
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Michael Wallace » Thu Nov 04, 2010 6:23 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:Plaices...

you know those fish...
Yeah, I guess it stems from this idiot.

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 » Thu Nov 04, 2010 10:38 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:Plaices...

you know those fish...
Plural is PLAICE, go with SPECIAL instead.

Lloyd Pettet
Rookie
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:26 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Lloyd Pettet » Sat Nov 06, 2010 11:34 am

Tenably. with tenable, untenable and untenably valid seems like tenably should be valid.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest