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
Steve Balog
Acolyte
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:18 am
Location: neither here nor there

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Steve Balog »

Gaijin baka desu~ (no I don't know or care if the sentence structure is right, actually speaking Japanese properly is actually very difficult, and thus is not kawaii sugoi desu~)

I had SKULLFUCK disallowed for KUF in a recent Aegilops game. Though, I think I was actually more disappointed that it would only have scored 6 if it were valid than it not being valid.
There are no such things as methods. Only madness.
User avatar
Mark Deeks
Fanatic
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Mark Deeks »

CODENAMES.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
User avatar
Steve Balog
Acolyte
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:18 am
Location: neither here nor there

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Steve Balog »

Thank you, girlfriend's obsessive fiber arts hobby, for making me think that DESTASH^ is a much, much more logical and sensical word than STASHED.
There are no such things as methods. Only madness.
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7751
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison »

BULEMIC.
User avatar
Thomas Carey
Kiloposter
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:17 pm
Location: North-West of Bradford
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Thomas Carey »

Matt Morrison wrote:BULEMIC.
Your 5000th post.
cheers maus
User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3778
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante »

Matt Morrison wrote:BULEMIC.
Get your fingers out of your throat for long enough, and you'll find that it's BULIMIC.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7751
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Matt Morrison »

Fucks sake, I knew that. Sums up how well I'm playing these days.
User avatar
Craig Beevers
Series 57 Champion
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 am
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Craig Beevers »

Yea it's an easy mistake to have made.

In Scrabble BUMELIA (a thorny tree) is a word. So if ABEILMU sits on your rack or comes up on Zyzzyva and you know there's an anagram it's easy to mess things up.
User avatar
Steve Balog
Acolyte
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:18 am
Location: neither here nor there

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Steve Balog »

BOOMBOX is apparently no good, quite surprised at that.

Also you can be a SKYWRITER, but you can't SKYWRITE.
There are no such things as methods. Only madness.
User avatar
Steve Balog
Acolyte
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:18 am
Location: neither here nor there

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Steve Balog »

I had INSINCERENESSES for 15.

INSINCERENESSES? No, I'm afraid not.

...

We managed to find a 13 in SINCERENESSES.

Image
There are no such things as methods. Only madness.
User avatar
Jennifer Steadman
Kiloposter
Posts: 1245
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:34 pm
Location: Kent
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Jennifer Steadman »

Steve Balog wrote:I had INSINCERENESSES for 15.

INSINCERENESSES? No, I'm afraid not.

...

We managed to find a 13 in SINCERENESSES.

Image
Heh - same case can be made for INSANENESSES (not valid) to SANENESSES (valid)...

Although I suppose in both senses it would have -ITY rather than -NESS(ES). Insincerity and insanity are both more efficient than insincereness(es) and insaneness(es).
"There's leaders, and there's followers, but I'd rather be a dick than a swallower" - Aristotle
User avatar
Mark Deeks
Fanatic
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Mark Deeks »

PHILTRUM.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3778
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante »

Mark Deeks wrote:PHILTRUM.
Don't get snotty about it.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

MISOPHONIA, especially since it's what the introduction was about today. I wondered why they didn't name it. Now I know.
Don't say the word! It will make our dictionary look stupid!
Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Tom S »

Uploader.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Wed Nov 27, 2019 2:44 pm MISOPHONIA, especially since it's what the introduction was about today. I wondered why they didn't name it. Now I know.
Don't say the word! It will make our dictionary look stupid!
Also, at the end of the programme today, I noticed on the thing at the bottom of the screen it was talking about their "webpage". Not in I'm afraid!
User avatar
Mark Deeks
Fanatic
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Mark Deeks »

TAVERNER.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2821
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by JimBentley »

I've been (badly) playing some Hyper Nasty Letters Attacks recently and knew that RATIONALS was inexplicably not in the dictionary, because I'd confidently declared it before only to have it disallowed (probably more than once knowing me). But I was playing a game just now and DC came out with IRRATIONALS! WTF's going on with that?
User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Kiloposter
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Johnny Canuck »

JimBentley wrote: Fri Aug 06, 2021 11:39 am I've been (badly) playing some Hyper Nasty Letters Attacks recently and knew that RATIONALS was inexplicably not in the dictionary, because I'd confidently declared it before only to have it disallowed (probably more than once knowing me). But I was playing a game just now and DC came out with IRRATIONALS! WTF's going on with that?
I have no explanation for that bizarre oddity. It’s just totally… oh, what’s the word?
MASTERGRAM
2 New Challenges Every Weekday
Way More Fun Than a Stick In the Eye!
Adam Latchford
Rookie
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2021 7:50 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Adam Latchford »

Girliest. Wang. The two biggies
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Fanatic
Posts: 2897
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Thanks for resurrecting this thread.

Why has MEDIAS been taken out again? Is it not the plural of social media? "I have updated the company's social medias."
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3778
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Ian Volante »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Fri Aug 06, 2021 6:59 pm Thanks for resurrecting this thread.

Why has MEDIAS been taken out again? Is it not the plural of social media? "I have updated the company's social medias."
It's already a plural. The problem is that the plural is used for the singular too.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Fanatic
Posts: 2897
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

I know that, etymologically speaking, it ought to be a plural noun, but in common usage "social medias" is definitely a thing.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2821
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by JimBentley »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 2:11 pm I know that, etymologically speaking, it ought to be a plural noun, but in common usage "social medias" is definitely a thing.
Only among idiots.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

SEEDINGS obviously. A bit of a joke omission.

Edit - Further discussion.
Tim Down
Acolyte
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:45 am

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Tim Down »

Yep. Number one on my list of weird omissions too. It's used *all the time* in sport.
Gavin Chipper wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 2:46 pm SEEDINGS obviously. A bit of a joke omission.

Edit - Further discussion.
User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Kiloposter
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Johnny Canuck »

TESSERACT. The 4-dimensional version of a square or cube, for those not in the know.

EDIT: it is in Scrabble though
MASTERGRAM
2 New Challenges Every Weekday
Way More Fun Than a Stick In the Eye!
Fiona T
Devotee
Posts: 862
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Fiona T »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 2:46 pm SEEDINGS obviously. A bit of a joke omission.

Edit - Further discussion.
It won the 'most plausible non-word' prize at co:lon, 'coz we've all declared it
User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1693
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 »

Chirpsy
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."
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

What would that mean?
User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1693
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 »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 7:29 am What would that mean?
Flirtatious basically, but specifically in conversation. "Baz was getting all chirpsy with Shaz at the party".
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."
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Adam Gillard wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 11:16 am
Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 7:29 am What would that mean?
Flirtatious basically, but specifically in conversation. "Baz was getting all chirpsy with Shaz at the party".
I had no idea this word exisited, but CHIRPSE is in as a verb, but there's no listed adjective to go with it.

Interestingly, Apterous has CHIRPSING, as opposed to CHIRPSEING, although Lexico (the free version at least) doesn't specify which would be valid, and neither redirect to CHIRPSE if you enter them. (You can have e.g. WHINGEING and WHINGING.)
User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1693
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 »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 11:31 am
Adam Gillard wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 11:16 am
Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 7:29 am What would that mean?
Flirtatious basically, but specifically in conversation. "Baz was getting all chirpsy with Shaz at the party".
I had no idea this word exisited, but CHIRPSE is in as a verb, but there's no listed adjective to go with it.

Interestingly, Apterous has CHIRPSING, as opposed to CHIRPSEING, although Lexico (the free version at least) doesn't specify which would be valid, and neither redirect to CHIRPSE if you enter them. (You can have e.g. WHINGEING and WHINGING.)
I feel it would be CHIRPSING only. Compare CORPSING (with laughter).
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."
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Susie claimed today when a word got disallowed that it's all frequency-based. It definitely isn't.
User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1693
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 »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 1:28 pm Susie claimed today when a word got disallowed that it's all frequency-based. It definitely isn't.
I suspect the dictionaries are based on frequency analysis of the Oxford Corpus, so Susie's probably right. If CHIRPSY or another word doesn't come up much in the publications used to build the corpus then it won't make the (more selective) dictionaries.
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."
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 11647
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Words You Would Have Thought...

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Adam Gillard wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 7:23 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 1:28 pm Susie claimed today when a word got disallowed that it's all frequency-based. It definitely isn't.
I suspect the dictionaries are based on frequency analysis of the Oxford Corpus, so Susie's probably right. If CHIRPSY or another word doesn't come up much in the publications used to build the corpus then it won't make the (more selective) dictionaries.
I'm sure that's partly it, though the Corpus is supposed to be a good sample across the spectrum of how English is used, both formal and informal.

But I think also you get old words that are basically never used any more that just stick around (e.g. GOUTINESS). Sometimes newer words get in really quickly seemingly for the headlines, whereas other more boring ones take longer even though they're common enough (I seem to remember some lag around LAGGY). Plus I think offensive words have a higher bar for inclusion.

And SEEDINGS still isn't in.
Post Reply