The word pair disinterested/uninterested is one that sparks some debate in certain circles. As you may be aware, the present day, prescribed definitions are the reverse of what they were several hundred years ago, as a trip to your friendly local OED will confirm (or even AHD4 at http://www.bartleby.com/61/32/D0273200.html). David Carkeet, in his light-hearted TVR article in the September issue (http://www.vocabula.com/2003/VRSept03Carkeet.htm) points out that these words, among others, do not exactly lend themselves to a great stability in meaning. I.e., there is nothing particular about the word disinterested that speaks for it meaning unbiased, impartial as opposed to lacking in interest.

Can anyone think of any other pairs of words that would belong to this dis/un family?

purely as a matter of interest, you understand, this is a many time yart. one of the instances links to the M-W usage gloss.
http://wordsmith.org/board/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=words&Number=96868

Disinterred would mean dug up. Uninterred would mean not buried. At least that is my impression.

Good one, Dr Bill.

And, tsuwm, the long involved explanation was using dis/uninterested merely as a starting point. Mainly I'm interested in word pairs such as the one offered by Dr Bill. I plead not guilty to any charge of default and yartery.

On a slight tangent check out Trustfulness/trustworthyness in Meta-words south of the line.

Disjointed means that the object was, at one time, connected at the joints, but these are either broken or out of place. Unjointed means that the object had no joints in the first place.

Father Steve's post reminded me of something: the correct term for Siamese twins now is "co-joined" twins. Why not "joined"?

I've only ever seen it as "conjoined" when referring to twins, but the question still holds: What's wrong with plain old "joined?"

What's wrong with plain old "joined?"

Conjoined, to clearly characterise a seamless contiguity. Plain join doesn't do that.

Another good one. Thanks, Father.

Faldage: "I plead not guilty to any charge of default and yartery."

Father Steve: If someone were sitting on a beach in Mexico, drinking the local beer and thinking about AWAD, and typed in a question which had been answered sometime in the distant past, but which eluded the quixotic search engine of this website, would that person be accused of suffering from Corona-ry yartery disease?

would that person be accused of suffering from Corona-ry yartery disease?

Not I 'cause I'd be sippin' on De Leon.

¡A mi, me gustaría tomar India!

Kalyani?

cross-thread: Nero Wolfe once burned a dictionary because it stated that imply and infer were synonyms.

and Webster's NI3 was (in 1961) roundly criticized for synonymizing dis- and un-interested.
There. Back on the subject.

Dislike and unlike are completely unrelated.

Disapprove and "unapprove" (= rescind) are getting closer.

Uncompliant and non-compliant? Only because the root has different meanings: (compliant = 1)obedient or 2)distensible)

Got one. Unused is different from disused: un- implies "never" and dis- implies (connotes? Sorry. Cross-threading again) "formerly but not any longer."

"Disuse atrophy" is what happens to muscles that have lost their nerve supply because of trauma or (more often) stroke.

disabused and unabused--there's is an other..
(is this really subject really a YART? -- it seems all new to me.)

dis-enchanted un-enchanted

[poof]

Disinfected/uninfected
Discover/uncover

Bingley

Good work, Bingley. The dis/uncover pair is the first one that wouldn't directly support the contention that the original defintions of dis/uninterested make more sense than the present-day prescriptions. They don't support the modern idea, either. Discover seems to be mostly more metaphoric.

Disable, unable?

On uninterred--my first thought was that something that HAD been buried had gotten dug up; but I can also (just) see someone inquiring about the current location of a corpse and being told it is uninterred yet.