Surely the question is not whether inciteful is a word, but whether it is a correct alphabetical representation of the word meaning "showing great insight"? Many would say that it is not, many would say that it is, and many don't give a toss.
In certain groups, using inciteful in this way will get you branded an ignoramus. In others it will pass without comment. Who are you trying to communicate with, and what do you wish to communicate?
Similarly the % sign is generally accepted as a representation of the words per cent.
Speech comes first. If a group of letters is accepted as a correct representation of speech sounds then it is a "word". If not, not.
If those who claim to be upholding correctness of diction were to truly do so, they would condemn 'inciteful' as a mis-spelling, not by saying, 'there's no such word'.
To take another example, one found on Jackie's grammar test, irregardless is a word in that it is a correct representation of speech sounds, but it is only used in very colloquial situations, not on formal occasions such as writing for the general public. Is this point somehow too difficult for aspiring writers and other schoolchildren to grasp and so they need to be fobbed off with the dismissive, "there's no such word"?
Bingley
