The suffix -oid, when tacked onto the end of a word (which is where all good suffixes go), means a thing similar to, resembling, like, related to or possessing the characteristics of the thing modified by the suffix. It is Latin, derived from Greek, I think (which might limit the words to which it gets appended, but not likely, these days).
(Why do I feel like the plural of suffix should be suffices?)
SciFi fans knows that an android is a thing (such as a robot) which is like a man but not a man. SciFi fans also know that a creature which is humanoid looks somewhat human but is not human. An asteroid is like a star but is not a star. Anthropoids are creatures which are like (and are related to) humans but aren't humans. I guess an alkaloid is a substance which is similar to an alka but isn't an alka.
So what's up with factoid? Following the pattern described above, a factoid should be like a fact but not a fact and therefore untrue or only partially true or almost true. But factoid is used to mean a little, curious, trivial, interesting fact. How come?
As I noted in another thread :
Because the World's gone mad!
Mad, I tell you. Mad!
Factoid often IS used to mean something resembling a fact without being one, such as "a duck's quack doesn't echo", "An ostrich's eyes are bigger than its brain" "Men are six times more likely to be struck by lightning than women", "Australians speak English", that kind of thing.
Ignoring his cruel attack on our convict cousins, I would tend to agree with Vernon. Whenever I hear or use "factoid", it's always with the sense of implicit spuriosity.
well, I recognise when I'm outnumbered by upsidedowners, but I still have to agree with the good Father - its connotation is surely mostly just like the suffix ~ette, leading to a sense of diminutive.
But perhaps the two aren't such a stretch apart... humanoid > less than human > oid=less... ?
ah, I've got Billie Holiday playing just now on this fine June night... "Me, Myself & I" trickling out into the balmy hayfield...
edit: not so balmy as barmy spellin'!
> Billie Holiday
For All We Know....
I suspect the confusion has come about from the fact that most people come across factoids in lists of 10 Amazing Things You Didn't Know About Lists, in which the trivial, the only true with lots of qualifications, and the downright false are all intermingled.
Perhaps in some places the ratios vary, and hence the confusion about what factoid means. I agree with Father Steve and the Southrons that factoid should and maybe does mean not quite true alleged fact.
Bingley
I don’t think we are saying radically different things, Bingley. I agree on the primary sense. But FS was correct in drawing attention to the other meaning - it exists, it's out there.
I think there is a clear case of language change going on in front of our eyes on this one - ~oid started out as ‘like or not quite real’ and has gathered a denotation of ‘small’ through repeated connotative association.
Websters merely records the two senses:
Main Entry:
fac•toidPronunciation: 'fak-"toid
Function: noun
1 : an invented fact believed to be true because of its appearance in print
2 : a brief and usually trivial news item
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=factoidAmerican Hurtage has an effective marker as a usage note:
NOUN:
1. A piece of unverified or inaccurate information that is presented in the press as factual, often as part of a publicity effort, and that is then accepted as true because of frequent repetition:
“What one misses finally is what might have emerged beyond both facts and factoids—a profound definition of the Marilyn Monroe phenomenon” (Christopher Lehmann-Haupt). 2.
Usage Problem A brief, somewhat interesting fact.
OTHER FORMS: fac•toid al —ADJECTIVE
USAGE NOTE: The –
oid suffix normally imparts the meaning “resembling, having the appearance of” to the words it attaches to. Thus the
anthropoid apes are the apes that are most like humans (from Greek
anthr pos, “human being”). In some words –
oid has a slightly extended meaning—“having characteristics of, but not the same as,” as in
humanoid, a being that has human characteristics but is not really human. Similarly,
factoid originally referred to a piece of information that appears to be reliable or accurate, as from being repeated so often that people assume it is true. The word still has this meaning in standard usage. Seventy-three percent of the Usage Panel accepts it in the sentence
It would be easy to condemn the book as a concession to the television age, as a McLuhanish melange of pictures and factoids which give the illusion of learning without the substance. •Factoid has since developed a second meaning, that of a brief, somewhat interesting fact, that might better have been called a
factette. The Panelists have less enthusiasm for this usage, however, perhaps because they believe it to be confusing. Only 43 percent of the panel accepts it in
Each issue of the magazine begins with a list of factoids, like how many pounds of hamburger were consumed in Texas last month. Many Panelists prefer terms such as
statistics, trivia, useless facts, and just plain
facts in this sentence.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/74/F0007400.htmlAn architect friend of mine refers with bitter disparagement to "bungaloids", and there is no doubt that he is referring to
small domestic habitations scattered in the countryside, with a further connotative connection with haemorrhoids!
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/haemorrhoid?view=uk
Explain yourself, young man. Earlier you said:
In reply to:
its connotation is surely mostly just like the suffix ~ette, leading to a sense of diminutive.(ea)
Now you say
In reply to:
I agree on the primary sense. But FS was correct in drawing attention to the other meaning - it exists, it's out there.(ea)
and go on to reference a dictionary which lists the meaning I offered as the first of two.
What size flipflops do you wear?
Primary: 1 a : first in order of time or development
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=primaryWhat’s crawled up your dunny and bit you?! ;0~
>What’s crawled up your dunny and bit you?! ;0~
I sniffed a bit of vacillation, as if soneone was trying to subtly abandon a former position, even perhaps trying to welsh on previous support for a repected cleric and judge. Being familar with trying to have a bob each way, I know what it looks like when someone else tries it on.
What’s crawled up your dunny and bit you?! ;0~
An addernoid - obviously.
How about:
3: A piece of information that, while true, is too insignificant to be considered a full-fledged fact.
> addernoid
:)
The equivocation was actually m’esteemed friend Mr B:
I agree with Father Steve and the Southrons that factoid should and maybe does mean not quite true alleged fact.I think this was subtly deceptive since I took FS to say that quite clearly the suffix meant something else when combined with the root 'fact', despite the origin and other forms of the suffix suggesting what it
should mean:
Following the pattern described above, a factoid should be like a fact but not a fact and therefore untrue or only partially true or almost true. But factoid is used to mean a little, curious, trivial, interesting fact. My position is that of a right Angle ;)
1. The suffix ~oid originally meant ‘like or sharing some characteristics’
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=-oid2. When it got appended to ‘fact’, the resulting word got used to initially mean ‘like a fact’ in an ironic deprecatory sense
3. Because these were often spurious and short items as Bing notes, it subsequently picked up the connotation of ‘brief fact’
4. By retrofitting this has extended the denotative value of ~oid to include ‘small’, making it similar to ~ette
5. Although the majority of the usage panel are still mostly uncomfortable, it’s a change, it’s happening, and it’s a comparatively rare example of one you can actually observe in progress.
I may well be wrong, but if so it’ s a consistently wrong view! :)
Those geeky enough to be familiar with the workings of a Microsoft product called BizTalk will know of "functoids" - small but not insignificant functions used to perform processing on data items passing through. Sounds more like something suitable for unmentionable ailments!
Welcome to the madhouse, hk :)
Thanks - another example from daily modern life that has garnered a sense of 'small' as part of its denotative value.
> data items passing through
And perhaps it had also gained by association with haemorrhoids! (as suggested above)
I like mav's five points.
I see a factoid as being a single, briefly expressed fact that, although interesting or surprising, is usually of so little import that it isn’t worth checking whether or not it is accurate, you just accept it (or not).
So, it is small, in the sense of brief, it is presented and accepted as a fact and often has an element of Ripley about it.
Not sure who I’m agreeing with here (if anyone
).
Edit: Hi hk, and welcome.
here's a factoid for you, based on the AHD data posted by mav: 27% of the Usage Panel has no useage at all for the word factoid.
a right Angle Groan-n-n-n!
Welcome to you, hk. Several new people today: yay! Welcome all!
The use of factoid in either sense doesn't bother me, but something that does is the w-i-d-e-spread use of lay for lie. Good thing I've got a dentist appointment pretty soon: every time I hear something like, "I'm going to lay down for a little while" it just sets my teeth on edge.
For me it's the other way, You lie about sneaking off to lay down.
edit; well not you personally
spuriosity
If that is an original coinage, sjmaxq, combining "spurious" and "curiosity", it's a clever one.
Bravo!
>I may well be wrong, but if so it’ s a consistently wrong view! :)
Let's see if I've managed to cut through all your brythonic blather and welsh waffle, and found something bearing at least a fleeting resemblance to something that might be mistaken for a point.
Basically, it seems that you are saying that Vernon and I are using the word in a sense that is rapidly becoming archaic, is that it? That the word used to mean what we use it to mean, but no longer does, na?
>teeth on edge over the use of the word "lay" for "lie down"
That's just USn linguistic hegemony rearing its ugly head again, Mrs F. The usage which troubles you so is completely standard on the civilised side of the Atlantic. To quote from the late and much lamented Arsenal fan, Douglas Adams:
In reply to:
"Now the world has gone to bed," Marvin droned,
"Darkness won't engulf my head,
"I can see by infra-red,
"How I hate the night."
He paused to gather the artistic and emotional strength to tackle the next verse.
"Now I lay me down to sleep,
"Try to count electric sheep,
"Sweet dream wishes you can keep,
"How I hate the night."
"Marvin!" hissed a voice.
(ea)
"Now I lay me down to sleep,
But... but... but... that's different, Max! In this case it becomes a transitive verb: the object is me. [/splutter]
In reply to:
But... but... but... that's different, Max! In this case it becomes a transitive verb: the object is me. [/splutter]
Well, Eddy, I don't want to jeopardise your respiration any further, so I will point out that la chère Kentuckienne did not make any distinction between transitive and intransitive use. Her exact words were:
"something that does is the w-i-d-e-spread use of lay for lie."
As it happens, the intransitive use is also quite common up here, so it's probably in the best interests of her dental wellbeing if she doesn't come here.
> rapidly becoming archaic
No.
If sjmaaxq got it wrong, could I impose on your time and ask you to explain how? In your earlier response you said:
In reply to:
My position is that of a right Angle ;)
1. The suffix ~oid originally meant ‘like or sharing some characteristics’
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=-oid
2. When it got appended to ‘fact’, the resulting word got used to initially mean ‘like a fact’ in an ironic deprecatory sense
That is the sense in which sjmaxq and I use it. Then you say further in your reply,
In reply to:
3. Because these were often spurious and short items as Bing notes, it subsequently picked up the connotation of ‘brief fact’
4. By retrofitting this has extended the denotative value of ~oid to include ‘small’, making it similar to ~ette
5. Although the majority of the usage panel are still mostly uncomfortable, it’s a change, it’s happening, and it’s a comparatively rare example of one you can actually observe in progress.
You talk about it "subsequently picking up a new connotation", and that there is "a change happening". If the change of which you speak is not the shift in the meaning of factoid from its initial one to the new one, what is it?
All needling aside, you've piqued my curiosity now, and I want to understand what you're saying. Or rather, I want to figure out why I have not been able to understand it up to this point.
> If the change of which you speak is not the shift in the meaning of factoid from its initial one to the new one, what is it?
An extension of meaning. Sure, if that became such a dominant usage, it's possible to imagine a world in which the very meaning of the suffix could get wrenched entirely into a new denotation: at that point, 'humanoid' might come to denote 'a small human-like creature'. I can't see evidence of that yet. But I think I do see evidence of language change producing an additional denotative sense for 'questionoid' (through repeated connotative association with the context of 'small'.)
By the way, if anyone thinks this is a trivial word to be loading so much attention on, it's mainly of interest to me as I said above: it's quite rare to be able to pin down language change until well after the event - like the old favourite 'nice'. It is also worth noting that language change often happens at the margins: amongst young people, non-invested people, and through language collision processes. I think this is such a case. <shrug> could well be wrong, of course.
Sorry, mav. It seems that Vernon and I were having so much fun tag-teaming you that we both missed this crucial little phrase:
In reply to:
I think there is a clear case of language change going on in front of our eyes on this one - ~oid started out as ‘like or not quite real’ and has gathered a denotation of ‘small’ through repeated connotative association."
Obviously I can't speak for Vernon, but I will try to read more carefully before putting the boot in next time.
>Obviously I can't speak for Vernon,
And don't you forget it! He is right about this, though. Sorry, maverick.
lol! No offence taken from any of you poor winter-dwellers, of course :)
Since it's always quite possible my 'thinking out aloud' will result in illogical rambling, fire away.
the w-i-d-e-spread use of lay for lie
What's the problem? We like regular verbs better than irregular verbs. Lie, as a regular verb means something totally else. There's plenty of verbs that combine transitive and intransitive usages without changing form. Lay and lie mean essentially the same thing differing only in their respective transitiveness.
>Lay vs Lie
Is simply a case of subconscious anti-semitism, a simmering resentment of Minnesota Jews.
> Lay and lie mean essentially the same thing
Tell that to Bob Dylan!
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bob-dylan/21168.html
Bob Dylan
Case in point. Or either him or Eric Clapton, both. Faced with the choice of two otherwise identical words, they both chose the more lyrical. I couldn't imagine them singing "Lie, lady, lie," or "Lie down, Sally." It just doesn't ring true.
> I couldn't imagine them singing "Lie, lady, lie," or "Lie down, Sally." It just doesn't ring true.
Yes, in terms of both poetry and meaning - a good lay is not the same thing as a good lie (or at least not always) :)
> Lie down, Sally.
why did I think that was Boz Scaggs?
Dunno - I now have an irrepressible urge to bop around with that wonderful pick-up rythym - "I've bin' tryin' all night long just-to-talk-to-you..!" Have to go see if it's still in the car.
>teeth on edge over the use of the word "lay" for "lie down"
That's just USn linguistic hegemony rearing its ugly head again, Mrs F. The usage which troubles you so is completely standard on the civilised side of the Atlantic. To quote from the late and much lamented Arsenal fan, Douglas Adams:
Not so, Max! You quote Marvin as saying "Now I lay me down to sleep"
You can lay yourself down (you can lay anything down), but you must LIE down. "lay" requires an object. (I am fully prepared for the spate of "lay" and "object" and "sex object" references no doubt flying my way.....)
Jackie, I'm so glad I'm not alone in the teeth-gritting over "I'm going to lay down"! Although I did read a worse one in a magazine that purportedly had an editor - "I lied down in the back of the van for a sleep."
You can lay yourself down (you can lay anything down), but you must LIE down. "lay" requires an object. I have been mantled by my own evil twin.
...a good lay is not the same thing as a good lie (or at least not always) :)
However sometimes a good lie will lead to a good lay, n'est ce pas?
Not that I am speaking from experience or anything like that! (blushing madly)
>I have been mantled by my own evil twin.
Well, join the club. I got in the first Dylan reference in this thread, which suffered a similar lack of acknowledgement.
You sure did, Vernon! Went right over my head the first time...
> lack of acknowledgement
But that's what your evil twin is here for, Vern :)
yrs, Obvious Odin & the Ronettes
sheeeeeeeeeesh, Minnesota Jews - couldja be a bit more abtruse next time, mite?!
>evil twin.
Who? Or are you offering to fill the role? If so, thanks. Max told me you work in marketing, so you're halfway there already.
> halfway there
and selling tickets for the grandstand ;)
And here I thought I was honoring its subtlety by not mentioning it directly.
And here I thought I was honoring its subtlety by not mentioning it directly.
Few of us can aspire to equal your deviosity.
dixbie, another ROTFLMAO!
(glad I had no coffee etc to spill on the keyboard)
deviosity = 1,610 English pages on Google
deviosity = root beer up my nose
>And here I thought I was honoring its subtlety by not mentioning it directly.
Forgive me, but I don't see that you mentioned it at all. You did quote the word Dylan from another person's post, though.
Forgive me
Geez, Vern, lighten up.
deviosity = 1,610 English pages on Google
deviosity = root beer up my nose
laughter = priceless
Once again I am late to the discussion but here's my two cents. The "-oid" suffix is used as a diminutive, probably because the more "proper" diminutive suffixes (factette, factling, factin) sound funny. The Spanish diminutive "-ito" would work well here IMO but factoid gets the job done too.
"And finally, despite what CNN thinks, a factoid is not a small, random fact. That would be a factlet or factette or, for our Latino friends, a factito."
~Matthew Alice, Straight from the Hip, San Diego Reader, December 2000.
http://www.sdreader.com/php/ma_show.php?id=120200BO Boyo
How perfectly he destroys his own case by describing his own assertion:
an assertion that is presented as a fact, that many people believe is a fact, but isn’t a fact.