Wordsmith.org
Posted By: Homo Loquens Your neologisms - 11/14/05 02:29 AM
Criterion: Must have arisen from necessity.



hangry

adj

a feeling of irritability, impatience or frustration resulting from a lack of food.

[ORIGIN : from "hungry" + "angry"]
Posted By: of troy Re: Your neologisms - 11/14/05 03:46 AM
Toy script
(from my then 4 year old when she was told her marking on paper were scribble scrabble--she replied, no they're not..they are toy script! (she still back talks, and she is still as witty!)
Posted By: dalehileman Re: Your neologisms - 11/14/05 03:11 PM
FACTOID (proposed definition)– 1) unverified, untrue, or invented fact. "Spurious report or supposition" - Norman Mailer; "...Bush has 'lost' more than a million jobs....This is a factoid of questionable validity" – Colorado Springs Gazette. 2) Brief or trivial fact or news item See POLYFACTOID below.

POLYFACTOID – (thanks to Wizard of Oz) Compound FACTOID; entire phrase, sentence, or definition simultaneoulsy contradictory, redundant, and simply false

The entire statement, “...Bush has ‘lost’ more than a million jobs....This is a factoid of questionable validity” (Colorado Springs Gazette) is itself a polyfactoid. It is contradictory because if the factoid is questionable the statement becomes redundant; but if the factoid is true, the statement is false See FACTOID--WordWizard


Submitted by dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Posted By: themilum Re: Your neologisms - 11/14/05 05:14 PM
Smokerettes
A neologism termed by my four-year-old son Danny back when smoking was cool. Danny and my other kids don't smoke today and that is cool.

A word coined for dale hileman...

Pooh-bah-taboo
Once I innocently mentioned "Bush" on this forum and some of the pooh-bahs here directed me toward a political forum where I could vent my political smoke. I think that the people here want a smoke-free-zone if you get my drift.
Posted By: Marianna Re: Your neologisms - 11/14/05 06:07 PM
tripeat verb

To repeat something twice; to do the same thing three times.

This was coined by a student of mine who claimed that if I failed him after the previous professor had also failed him in that same subject, he'd be tripeating the subject the following year. For some reason, from his viewpoint, this was just not on...

NOTE: this verb seems to have endless semantic potential. I could have objected to the tripe my tripeating student had written in his final exam essay, for instance... Not to mention the endless unnutritious snacking that seems to accompany long-distance car journeys...
Posted By: Owlbow Your neighborhood neologism - 11/14/05 06:21 PM
There is a similar word that U.S. (elsewhere too?) sportscasters use. Threepeat. As in, "The N.E. Patriots failed in their bid to threepeat as world champs".
They probably eat too much junk food too.
I like tripeat three times better.
Posted By: of troy Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/14/05 07:32 PM
actually milum, we tried to avoid all politics here..

the europeans (and there are number) tend to have a very different take on world events than we do ..

did you ever read the discussion on the war of 1812 (and who won it?) going on 200 year old policital events, and the topic was heated (who won? why everyone! the treat of ghent allowed everyone to walk away thinking they had won, so the south got to brag about Jackson (and the battle of NO's, (the northerns got to point out the battle was moot, and the canadians got brag about how they repelled (and defeated the NY's (and NEnglanders) and the english got bragging rights too.. and yet, we all managed to get our national pride up, and 're-fight' the war!

being a northern liberal i have (i suspect!) a very different take on Bush (and his presidency) than you do. but it doesn't matter. this is not really a politic BB, and while we have once or twice bashed Bush for the way he mangles english (something i think we both can agree on!) We tend to try (and like many other things, we often have failures) but still we try to avoid discussing policy or its outcomes.
Locally NY mayor (bloomberg) is taking credit for a dramatic drop in crime rate.. but the fact is crime is down, not just in NY, but many places, (some with good government, some with poor government). it seems what ever is driving the rate down has nothing to do with local politics.

bloomberg also boasted about creating jobs here in NYC (and in this he is right--why he spent $85 million on his campaign! i am sure that Ad men, and TV producers, and film editors, and camera men, and many other involved in creating the media blitz all were. a percent of the 85 million went to wages, i am sure(at least temporaliy!) all those people involved in making all the media messages were gainfully employed! (not to mention the Printers, and poster designers, and telephone call services people!

Well there i done it too, discussed politics.. well my post will be virtually ignored because of its political content.. (and we will go back to discussing words/language, and putting up with Ted's pun, etc...)
Posted By: Alex Williams Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/14/05 09:32 PM
Blogument a senseless, sometimes impassioned, often lengthy argument on a weblog or internet forum; may escalate into a flamewar.
Posted By: dalehileman Re: Your neologisms - 11/14/05 11:18 PM
Sorry, but you misunderstand my example. It was entirely nonpolitical. The polyfactoid is the second phrase and does not hinge upon the truth of the first
Posted By: dalehileman Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/14/05 11:23 PM
I believe "blogument" would be a blend word or portmanteau
Posted By: wofahulicodoc getting into niceties - 11/15/05 01:32 AM
... more a "phonetic blendword/portmanteau" [blog/argument] than an orthographic one [paradigm "chortle"]
Posted By: Marianna Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/15/05 09:51 AM
If I may paraphrase Eeyore, you mean that this tripeat thing was something US sportscasters knew?

And here I was so sure that my student was a linguistic genius despite all appearances!
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/15/05 01:45 PM
Didn't a basketball coach try to patent or copyright or trademark the word "threepeat"?
Posted By: inselpeter Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/15/05 01:56 PM
Quote:

Didn't a basketball coach try to patent or copyright or trademark the word "threepeat"?




As I am trying to patent "nuts?"
Posted By: TEd Remington Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/15/05 02:14 PM
patently
Posted By: Buffalo Shrdlu Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/15/05 03:44 PM
you guys been smoking your Mary Janes?
Posted By: Jackie Father Steve was right - 11/15/05 04:05 PM
Sometimes people copyright or trademark the words they coin. Legendary basketball coach Pay Riley, for instance, owns the rights to the term ‘threepeat.’ In 1988 Riley was coach of the Los Angeles Lakers, who had just won their second championship in a row. Riley and Laker guard Byron Scott were sitting around a swimming pool in Hawaii trying to formulate a catchy phrase that would motivate the Lakers to win another championship in 1989. The phrase they came up with was ‘threepeat,’ and Riley immediately trademarked it
Socrates
Posted By: Logwood Re: Father Steve was right - 11/15/05 04:14 PM
Being an NBA fan and a logomaniac, that's an interesting fact. My two greatest passions coming together... basketball and words.. woah, I kinda feel turned on...
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Father Steve was right - 11/16/05 05:29 AM
May I go on record as saying that any post captioned "Father Steve was right" is okay in my book?
Posted By: Alex Williams Re: Father Steve was right - 11/16/05 12:29 PM
I believe "blogument" would be a blend word or portmanteau

This is true. Of course my post was more of an editorial comment on the direction the thread was going rather than a submission of a genuine neologism.
Posted By: Homo Loquens Re: Father Steve was right - 11/16/05 12:50 PM
Blogument a senseless, sometimes impassioned, often lengthy argument on a weblog or internet forum; may escalate into a flamewar. [...] Of course my post was more of an editorial comment on the direction the thread was going rather than a submission of a genuine neologism.

I'm a little hangry this afternoon, but shouldn't this kind of toy-script blogument be a Pooh-bah-taboo?
Posted By: of troy Re: Father Steve was right - 11/16/05 01:46 PM
Nope-- there are very few taboo's here (the biggest are the old fashioned 'social ones'--don't talk religion or politics. and in general, we tend to use language that would be acceptable at a party our grandmothers might attend... simple because there are teachers who use AWAD in the class room, and we don't generally want to make this an adult only (in the worst possible way).

i was wordy, and almost over the line.. and alex gave the equivalent of the sharp look i might get from a host/hostest when a guest steps over the line. and the thread went on.

I didn't take offence (nor was one really given)
everyone here self moderates. we each decide for ourself what is taboo-- (and occationally when we slip, someone points in the right direction.)
(and people who can't self moderate are generally not welcome)
Posted By: Jackie Re: Father Steve was right - 11/16/05 03:17 PM
May I go on record as saying that any post captioned "Father Steve was right" is okay in my book?
Posted By: musick Grandmother clause - 11/16/05 06:50 PM
...we tend to use language that would be acceptable at a party our grandmothers might attend...



Speak for/as yourself. (One of) my grandmothers would not really be *acceptable here.
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Grandmother clause - 11/16/05 10:22 PM
Once my paternal grandmother reached her eighties, she began to swear in public, mostly to embarass my father, who (she thought) deserved it.
Posted By: inselpeter Re: Grandmother clause - 11/16/05 10:47 PM
Quote:

Once my paternal grandmother reached her eighties, she began to swear in public, mostly to embarass my father, who (she thought) deserved it.




FS: I don't mean this to be snide; I really want to know. Why did you insert a comma between 'my father' and 'who?'
Posted By: musick There ain't no sanity clause - 11/16/05 11:32 PM
Why did you insert a comma between 'my father' and 'who?'

I can only guess, but, maybe the public that which was *deserving.
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Grandmother clause - 11/17/05 01:45 AM
I elected to treat the clause "who deserved it" as an independent clause linked to and modifying "my father" by "who" which I chose to treat as if it were a coordinating conjunction, in which case, it would properly be set off from "my father" by a comma. I also did it because it suited my ear.
Posted By: sjmaxq Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 03:00 AM
Quote:

actually milum, we tried to avoid all politics here..




Some of us just avoid Milum. Such blessed tranquility.
Posted By: Bingley Re: Grandmother clause - 11/17/05 03:56 AM
I always understood the rule to be comma for identifying relative clauses and no comma for non-identifying clauses.

So, "my brother who deserves it" would imply I have more than one brother and this particular brother deserves it, while "my brother, who deserves it" would imply that I only have one brother who is therefore sufficiently identified by the expression "my brother" and "who deserves it" is simply extra information about my brother.

Since Father Steve presumably has only one father, the expression "my father" identifies who is meant and so the comma is usual.
Posted By: inselpeter Re: Grandmother clause - 11/17/05 04:02 AM
Thanks.
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Grandmother clause - 11/17/05 06:00 AM
I love it when Bingley explains me better than me do.
Posted By: themilum Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 11:10 AM
Quote:

Quote:

actually milum, we tried to avoid all politics here..




Some of us just avoid Milum. Such blessed tranquility.






And some of us Milums try to avoid all Maxims except for you, sweet Max.
Posted By: tsuwm Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 04:41 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

actually milum, we tried to avoid all politics here..




Some of us just avoid Milum. Such blessed tranquility.




And some of us Milums try to avoid all Maxims except for you, sweet Max.




what max means, milum, is that he's got you on his ignore list,
and so he only sees messages about you. (hi max)
-ron o.
Posted By: themilum Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 05:04 PM
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

actually milum, we tried to avoid all politics here..




Some of us just avoid Milum. Such blessed tranquility.




And some of us Milums try to avoid all Maxims except for you, sweet Max.




what max means, milum, is that he's got you on his ignore list,
and so he only sees messages about you. (hi max)
-ron o.




Well now, one would think that if Max has me on his ignore list he would ignore all comments about me and politely refrain from snide comments about his blessed state.

Now wouldn't one?
Posted By: Alex Williams Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 06:14 PM
I'm glad that no offense was taken at what was editorializing of the tongue-in-cheek variety rather than the fire and brimstone sort, which I try to always leave to men and women of the cloth. And furthermore, Father Steve is always right.
Posted By: maygodbwidu Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 06:33 PM
helu people..

dont have much to add here but yaa...must say i had a good time reading all the posts here..funnyy..speacially the "father steve is always right"....greatt..have fun..
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Your neighborhood neologism - 11/17/05 07:44 PM
Father Steve is always right

Would that my wife, children, bishop, congregation, tax accountant and the Court of Appeals all agreed.
Posted By: maverick Re: farther my lord from thee - 11/18/05 11:31 PM
> Since Father Steve presumably has only one father...

Which one's he stopped believin' in?!
© Wordsmith.org