Spoilers for Friday 4th February (Series 85, Prelim 25)

[Thomas Carey]

Dan game 7 now

[Philip A]

They really don’t like OUTLAIN, do they?

[Gavin Chipper]

They really don’t like OUTLAIN, do they?

Should it be allowed? I see it is on Apterous. But is this on the basis of it being the past participle of OUTLIE? In the free version, the definition is "To outdo in lying", which seems more likely to be fibbing than lying down, although it's not specified. I think this has come up before.

[Philip A]

They really don’t like OUTLAIN, do they?

Should it be allowed? I see it is on Apterous. But is this on the basis of it being the past participle of OUTLIE? In the free version, the definition is "To outdo in lying", which seems more likely to be fibbing than lying down, although it's not specified. I think this has come up before.

This disallowal makes it invalid 3-1 https://wiki.apterous.org/index.php?tit ... fulltext=1. When it was allowed in 2019, it caused head-scratching here viewtopic.php?p=187638&hilit=OUTLAIN#p187638 and was ticketed for addition on Apterous here https://www.apterous.org/ticket_view.ph ... 857#p63757.

While a definitive word lost would be beneficial, I do think Countdown needs to agree on a new, rigorous rule for unspecified inflections (past/present tenses, participles, plurals etc.) so that they can consistently accept any logical and sensible inflections of headwords. This way, decisions are not affected by external factors such as mood, environment etc.

The rule I would set out here to consistently allow OUTLAIN is:

If a verb with a prefix has no specified subentries, it should be assumed to take the same inflections as the root verb.

For example:

REFOOT has no inflections but FOOT > FOOTED, FOOTING, hence REFOOTED and REFOOTING are correct.

RECATCH has no inflections but CATCH > CAUGHT, hence RECAUGHT is correct.

However:

If inflections of the prefixed verb are specified in bold, only those can should be accepted.

For example:

The existence of SHINE > SHINED, SHONE does not mean outshined x is valid, because the specified past and past participle of OUTSHINE is very specifically OUTSHONE.

This practice can also work for unspecified but sensible and logical plurals such as HEDARIM (assumed plural of HEDER since CHEDER > CHEDARIM is given in ODO), and if a headword is spelled -IZE then the -ISE spelling will be allowed even if not specified (e.g. MINORIZE > MINORISE and its inflections -IZ/SED and -IZ/SING).

On that basis, I am of the opinion that it is correct to allow OUTLIES, OUTLIED, OUTLAIN and OUTLYING.

I do think Countdown is getting too strict TBH. I would certainly have given leeway for OUTLAIN, MILEAGES, ELASTICS and so on. I would allow seafoods x because FOOD itself can be a mass noun or a countable noun (have seen a YouTuve vid saying, “eating seafoods”).

[Gavin Chipper]

The rule I would set out here to consistently allow OUTLAIN is:

If a verb with a prefix has no specified subentries, it should be assumed to take the same inflections as the root verb.

...

On that basis, I am of the opinion that it is correct to allow OUTLIES, OUTLIED, OUTLAIN and OUTLYING.

While I think most people would agree with the general principle, the problem with OUTLIE is that it's not specified which LIE is being used. But looking at Fiona's post here:

Was wondering about this today.

Both free and premium give the following source

"Mid 17th century; earliest use found in John Donne (1572–1631), poet and Church of England clergyman. From out- + lie."

googling finds this

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uJj ... ie&f=false

But pedant's motley tongue, soldier's bombast,
Mountebank's drug-tongue, nor the terms of law
Are strong enough preparatives to draw
Me to bear this; yet I must be content
With his tongue. In his tongue, called compliment,
In which he can win windows and pay scores,
Make men speak treason, cozen subtlest whores,
Out-flatter favourites, or outlie either
Jovius or Surius or both together,
He names me, and comes to me; I whisper, God!

Hmm, not sure what he's doing with his tongue

But I think he's talking about telling lies.

IMO outlain is nonsense and has been disallowed more times (lots) than allowed (once).

It seems that it should be interpreted as outfib so in that sense of LIE, OUTLAIN would not be allowed.

[Philip A]

The rule I would set out here to consistently allow OUTLAIN is:

If a verb with a prefix has no specified subentries, it should be assumed to take the same inflections as the root verb.

...

On that basis, I am of the opinion that it is correct to allow OUTLIES, OUTLIED, OUTLAIN and OUTLYING.

While I think most people would agree with the general principle, the problem with OUTLIE is that it's not specified which LIE is being used. But looking at Fiona's post here:

Was wondering about this today.

Both free and premium give the following source

"Mid 17th century; earliest use found in John Donne (1572–1631), poet and Church of England clergyman. From out- + lie."

googling finds this

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uJj ... ie&f=false

But pedant's motley tongue, soldier's bombast,
Mountebank's drug-tongue, nor the terms of law
Are strong enough preparatives to draw
Me to bear this; yet I must be content
With his tongue. In his tongue, called compliment,
In which he can win windows and pay scores,
Make men speak treason, cozen subtlest whores,
Out-flatter favourites, or outlie either
Jovius or Surius or both together,
He names me, and comes to me; I whisper, God!

Hmm, not sure what he's doing with his tongue

But I think he's talking about telling lies.

IMO outlain is nonsense and has been disallowed more times (lots) than allowed (once).

It seems that it should be interpreted as outfib so in that sense of LIE, OUTLAIN would not be allowed.

Language has evolved long since the 17th century so I think going by the origin here would be a huge stretch.

[Fiona T]

Also -

Suzie's comment at the time:

"Scratching my head over outlain, Maggie, but if something lies beyond or on the outside of something geographically, that is to outlie obviously and the sensible past participle would be outlain."

However, neither version of dictionary gives the lie beyond definition - both say "outdo in lying".

Basically on the occasion it was allowed, Susie allowed it based on a made up (but logical) definition that was not in either dictionary. IMO it should not be allowed.

[Ronan M Higginson]

Also -

Suzie's comment at the time:

"Scratching my head over outlain, Maggie, but if something lies beyond or on the outside of something geographically, that is to outlie obviously and the sensible past participle would be outlain."

However, neither version of dictionary gives the lie beyond definition - both say "outdo in lying".

Basically on the occasion it was allowed, Susie allowed it based on a made up (but logical) definition that was not in either dictionary. IMO it should not be allowed.

Likewise. I'm sorry but I do believe that Susie is the one to make the most valid opinion here.

[Philip A]

Googling suggests OUTLAIN is sensible, which is enough for me, but I’m not blind to nuance and not bothered either way.

[Johnny Canuck]

COULOIRS to beat COLOURS.

[Carl Harrison]

Likewise. I'm sorry but I do believe that Susie is the one to make the most valid opinion here.

I definitely agree with this. The problem is when Susie makes a different adjudication for the same word in different episodes. Which one to believe? But as a rule of thumb, I'd suggest that whatever has been adjudicated in the most recent episode where the word has occurred should be the current ruling (perhaps unless there is a very clear error).

So for now, I think OUTLAIN needs to be removed from the list of valid words on Apto.

[Fiona T]

Likewise. I'm sorry but I do believe that Susie is the one to make the most valid opinion here.

I definitely agree with this. The problem is when Susie makes a different adjudication for the same word in different episodes. Which one to believe? But as a rule of thumb, I'd suggest that whatever has been adjudicated in the most recent episode where the word has occurred should be the current ruling (perhaps unless there is a very clear error).

So for now, I think OUTLAIN needs to be removed from the list of valid words on Apto.

And MILEAGES

[Gavin Chipper]

Language has evolved long since the 17th century so I think going by the origin here would be a huge stretch.

It's just to indicate what sense of "lie" is being used.

[Toby McDonald]

Was hoping for FASCICULA in R13, but there's just FASCICULAR, FASCICULE and FASCICULI.