|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
In writing to a group to which I had posed a question for their deliberation a month ago, I wanted to describe them, collectively, as the recipients of that question. I typed "interrogants" which caused consternation in my MS spellchecker. I suspect that "interrogantes" is a perfectly good word in several Latin-based languages but perhaps not in English. In its place, I substituted "interrogatees" ... which can actually be found in several dictionaries. But it sounds so legal -- like the people who have to respond to interrogatories in a civil lawsuit.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
It does sound a bit off-putting, Fr Steve. How about "respondents"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
"Respondents" is good but applies only to those who actually answered the question, which is less than all of those to whom it was put.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
I think I prefer your subject word over interrogatees, Father Steve. I don't know that there is one good, common word. I've heard the term 'target audience', but I don't think that quite fits what you're looking for. I'm not sure what you're writing, but perhaps 'question receivers', 'question-receivers', or 'hoped-for respondents' would be an acceptable compromise between the I-wouldn't-want-to-use-it-in-a-legal-document questionees and the rather stilted interrogatees. [/rambling for now]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
What was lacking in your own 'recipient'?
The only other one I can think of would be a receiver, but I like recipient better.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
Funny, isn't it? English pairs up so many nouns to indicate the actor and the recipient of the action ... but not this one, not well, at least. Thanks for all of your wonderful thoughts and observations.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624 |
How about "cohort", Padre? Statistical, but not legal ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
>I wanted to describe them, collectively, as the recipients of that question.
Well, there's always "youse guys." And since I'm assuming this has nothing to do with questions based on your judicial job, I guess perps and suspects aren't good. But I will say that's an interesting question. Somewhere there's a word.
Were you Catholic I'd suggest inquisitee. OH! inquiree! 400 plus goggle hits, most of which match your requirements.
TEd
TEd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,788 |
Cohort is an interesting suggestion. Inquiree is a winner!
Ding, ding, ding. Bring out the prizes, Vanna.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,413
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
1 members (wofahulicodoc),
998
guests, and
6
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
