Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
BranShea #167190 03/26/07 04:42 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 557
M
addict
Offline
addict
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 557
On onelook, this word only appears in one general dictionary and one botanical dictionary.

The general dictionary (InfoPlease) says it means hirtellous and that hirtellous means "minutely hirsute. Also,hirsutulous." I find "minutely" somewhat vague. Is that small hairs, a small patch of hairs, sparse hairs, ...

I liked the botanical dictionary's "slightly hirsute" better - until I found that they define hirsute as "Pubescent with rather coarse or stiff hairs." (^_^)

Myridon #167199 03/27/07 02:20 AM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 72
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 72
What are the types that you speak of with no pretense of archaisms?

I gather that type 1 words are used in everyday verbal communications, and type 2 words are somewhat more difficult. Are the distinctions purely subjective, or is there some rubric? How many types are there?


I exist! I am a pedant! I have a foreboding signature!
Curuinor #167202 03/27/07 10:16 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
As I understand it, Type 1 words, as you say, are used in everyday verbal communications, Type 2 are words you recognize but wouldn't normally use, Type 3 are words that you have to look up in a dictionary. This categorization is purely subjective; one person's type 3 word might be another's Type 1.

Faldage #167203 03/27/07 10:20 AM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
> This categorization is purely subjective

it is indeed. however, I think it works on a basic level. think three overlapping bell curves.


formerly known as etaoin...
Buffalo Shrdlu #167207 03/27/07 01:49 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Fal, Cur: Yes, good. Eta has also defined the categories pretty well in

http://wordsmith.org/board/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/165723/page/1/fpart/5

Join me in my quest to proliferate the Type-2 which however wouldn't generally be considered "difficult". Of course the distinctions are somewhat subjective but it's fun to speculate on the divarications

The last is of Type-3; bestowed herewith only for its heuristic value but in a spirit of persiflage



dalehileman
dalehileman #167208 03/27/07 02:13 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
that link goes all wonky for me, try this:

language taxonomies

that's a link to the whole thread; I think it's worth reading. there are others who think it's not.


formerly known as etaoin...
Buffalo Shrdlu #167209 03/27/07 02:15 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Especially not for Helen, bless her soul; but thank you for the link


dalehileman
dalehileman #167211 03/27/07 02:26 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
> Especially not for Helen

yeah, she doesn't like you.


formerly known as etaoin...
dalehileman #167212 03/27/07 02:50 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
dale, you got off on the wrong foot with me with your original def'n of type-3 words: Snooty words not used much in everyday conversation, eg, cachinnation

for me, this is remindful of those who railed against the earliest English lexicographers (16th C) who included "inkhorn terms" in their dictionaries; that is, "dark words" or Latinate neologisms (such as employed by a variety of writers since the 14th C).

later (17th C), many inkhorn terms having been accepted (and others perforce rejected), dictionaries became the repository for "hard words." this term was far less pejorative, as it was accepted that many of our best writers used language "not used much in everyday conversation" and needing explication.

surely there is no need at this late date to revert to such a negative classification of words. I for one take umbrage at the notion that my vocabulary may somehow be thought of as "Snooty."

---

I'll be back later (hi Milo) to provide examples from this earlier age, if that would be helpful.

- joe (Chasing the Sun) friday

tsuwm #167216 03/27/07 04:06 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
> Snooty

and I say that nearly anyone else on this forum could have used the word snooty in the same way and everyone would have known what was meant, and the connotation thereof.


formerly known as etaoin...
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,580
Members9,187
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Karin, JeffMackwood, artguitar, Jim_W, Rdbuffalo
9,187 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 332 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
wofahulicodoc 10,713
tsuwm 10,542
LukeJavan8 9,931
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5