|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
WW:
Since you said that you don't agree that eoxlibnsdaienvlab means wistfully, there currently exists that series of letters which has meaning to only one person. In that case it isn't a word. But if two or more people make it a word, it is because it can theoretically facilitate communication twixt two people. You'll note that I used the word provided in my prior post.
To go a bit further, some people were discussing whether a picture is a word. Yes and no. In my view a picture of an airplane isn't necessarily a word because is a great deal of ambiguity of what it means. It can mean a particular plane, one with two wings and a tail; it could mean airplanes as a class, whether they have two, four, or even six wings, or whether they are powered by people or by the most advanced engine. Others might also construe it to be the verb to fly. Even others might construe it to be an example of a construct in its most generic terms. Context is important for ideograms of this type, so they remain a form of communication which doesn't achieve word-dom, imho.
But when, as with %, there is a universal agreement that it means divided by 100, then it becomes a word. There is nothing magical in individual letters that can restrict the mind from understanding the concept behind them.
Consider the octothorpe, however. It has several meanings, none of which are so universal as to allow us to look at the # and say interally, "Ah, that means 16 avordupois ounces." In context you can puzzle out its meaning, but not by itself.
Of course this leads to a discussion of, for example, the word lead. By itself you don't know whether it means the long-e verb, the short-e word for the element Pb, the long-e word for leash, or the long-e word for clue. Is lead a word? Of course it is. Which word it is depends on context. Now, why isn't # also a word of differing meanings which must be determined through context?
Suddenly I have a headache and I don't want to continue this line of thought any more!!!!! Translated:I don't know the answer and somehow I wrote myself into this damned corner. ARGH!!
TEd goes away whistling "All I want is a rune somewhere..."
TEd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
"is it now a word" is to me a very interesting tangent to our main theme. I go back to what I have labeled the "non-word" zzxjoanw. this was seemingly inserted as a joke into a dictionary of musical terms with the literally impossible definition a Maori drum. (this generated a previous thread herein which is eminently searchable and a good exercise for the student :) zzxjoanw was latterly picked up by unusual word books, notably Mrs. Byrne's, wherein Josefa Heifitz helpfully provides pronunciation (see below). this has all engendered much online raillery (ycliu). one explanation of the joke is that it's a spoof on some Joan W's name. ziks-jo'an .. [a=schwa] so, is this non-word a word? --- then we have what have been labeled ghost words. the best example I have to mind at the moment is "dord". this initially saw the light of day as a typo (typo was prolly not a word at the time) in Webster's Second New Int'l Dictionary (Unab.) this apparently was a typesetter's mistake for the wanted entry "D or d". see here for a more complete story and the actual entry as it appeared in W2. (this ghost word was removed from W3 except as an example of the entry "ghost word") http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dordhere is the W3 entry for those who dont.. : ghost word - an accidental word form never in established usage; especially : one arising from an editorial or typographical error or a mistaken pronunciation (as phantomnation or dord)
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. so, is this ghost-word a word? NB: W3 classes it as an accidental "word form". this seems to be a useful term for use here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
so, is this non-word a word?
Is this non-word a word?
Need I say more?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
>is this non-word a word?
as noted above, the term non-word is my conceit. the question stands for purpose of our discussion.
[EDIT]plutarch, you changed the context of your comment after I replied, without notation; it would be helpful to readers if you would so mark edit when you do this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
the question stands for purpose of our discussion
Perhaps, but the discussion stands without purpose.
Edit: What comes first? The chicken or the egg? The meaning or the word?
This is what I mean, tsuwm. We can go around and around with "What is a word?" forever, and we are always back where we started.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
ghost word - an accidental word form never in established usage
There is an important principle enshrined here which I think goes to the heart of the matter. We can agree that there are putative or potential words - forms of representation that seem to be possible constructions to carry meaning, even if we know not the meaning yet... but it is not until there is established usage in a speech community that it becomes recognisable as a word. Hence we can all come up with witty coinages that seem to represent a possible transfer of meaning, but it will not be a word until given currency by use.
How large or sustained that community of users needs to be I am happy to leave to OEDipus Rex :)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
I am happy to leave to OEDipus Rex :)
Sounds like we're saying the same thing, Maverick.
A word is a word when OEDipus says it is. And it is also a word before OEDipus says it is, if it has some meaning for someone. But it is not a word to anyone if it has no meaning for anyone. In this case, it is a non-word, an unintelligible word, a nonsense word, or a lost word. Perhaps we can all agree about that.
Edit: Perhaps, I will have the last word. Or, perhaps, not.
In any event, "In the beginning was the Word." Before OEDipus. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,189
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
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
Bingley
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,328
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
763
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
