The rather awesome thread of word creation
Moderator: Michael Wallace
- Joseph Krol
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:47 pm
The rather awesome thread of word creation
Everyone has a time once a week when they think, "Why does the English language have no word for that?" (Well they probably don't but I'm saying it so I get some replies.) It is commonly said that English has a word for everything. Let the online Countdown enthusiasts aid this most awesome of languages to its full capacity of vocabulary!
Four ways to reply:
1) With a new word and new definition;
2) With a new definition;
3) With a new word;
4) Suggesting a word or definition for 2) or 3) respectively.
Of course you can just reply for the hell of it, seeing as that is what 87.63% of posts on c4countdown fall under.
Here's a few to start you off:
Interbabble, v. To interrupt a conversation, only to talk incoherently, quickly, or deviate from the topic so that your contribution to the conversation is useless.
Pfennig-quantiser (needs definition)
(needs word) To bounce along the ground due to a combination of fatness and falling over at speed.
Good luck, my lexicalinventorforumpersons,
Joseph
Four ways to reply:
1) With a new word and new definition;
2) With a new definition;
3) With a new word;
4) Suggesting a word or definition for 2) or 3) respectively.
Of course you can just reply for the hell of it, seeing as that is what 87.63% of posts on c4countdown fall under.
Here's a few to start you off:
Interbabble, v. To interrupt a conversation, only to talk incoherently, quickly, or deviate from the topic so that your contribution to the conversation is useless.
Pfennig-quantiser (needs definition)
(needs word) To bounce along the ground due to a combination of fatness and falling over at speed.
Good luck, my lexicalinventorforumpersons,
Joseph
Last edited by Joseph Krol on Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
- Joseph Krol
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:47 pm
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
So he does. Thank you for your contribution, but I am fearful to add these to the list for fear of breaking copyright laws, being sent to prison, and being tortured by being forced to play Anagrammatic for eternity.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
The absence of an opposite of elevate troubles me occasionally, so maybe delevate or something. lower doesn't quite do it.
On the creative side, I think this forum has done its part to bring lexonerd into common currency.
On the creative side, I think this forum has done its part to bring lexonerd into common currency.
- Joseph Krol
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:47 pm
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
Charlie Reams wrote:The absence of an opposite of elevate troubles me occasionally, so maybe delevate or something. lower doesn't quite do it.
On the creative side, I think this forum has done its part to bring lexonerd into common currency.
Lexonerd definitely.
Delevate is quite good; how about alevate?
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
There should be an equivalent to fewer for more, so we can have another thing to feel pedantically superior about.
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
My contribution already recorded in a similar thread.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13380
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
The fact that there isn't is one of the reasons that I argue that it's fine to use "less" instead of "fewer". The argument goes - "less" is just the opposite of "more". "fewer" is just a separate word that has no direct opposite. We would use "less" if "fewer" didn't exist and its existence doesn't change the validity of "less" in cases where "fewer" will also do.Michael Wallace wrote:There should be an equivalent to fewer for more, so we can have another thing to feel pedantically superior about.
I use the words "bes" and "beed" where "is" and "was" don't really fit.
- Lesley Hines
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1250
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
- Location: Worcester
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
Frankie Boyle described someone as a 'fucknugget', which was definitely my word of the day.
Lowering the averages since 2009
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:20 am
Re: The rather awesome thread of word creation
Speaking of things that are usually ungrammatical, I sometimes think it would be useful to have a kind of meta-comparative: "Alex is more taller than Pat than Pat is than Sam."Gavin Chipper wrote:The fact that there isn't is one of the reasons that I argue that it's fine to use "less" instead of "fewer". The argument goes - "less" is just the opposite of "more". "fewer" is just a separate word that has no direct opposite. We would use "less" if "fewer" didn't exist and its existence doesn't change the validity of "less" in cases where "fewer" will also do.Michael Wallace wrote:There should be an equivalent to fewer for more, so we can have another thing to feel pedantically superior about.
I use the words "bes" and "beed" where "is" and "was" don't really fit.