Language Nazis Unite!

bridgeburner said:
I think it's a word-meld between mischievous and devious.


----and if I were really any damn good I'd know a proper term for "word-meld".


-B
Gramorph?
 
blue kat said:
Wow! That DVS is awfully mischievous tonight.
Well, I had a pisser of a day at work and I need something to take a little steam off. This is working quite nicely.

Although I'm still pissed, and I have to go work with the BITCH...YES I SAID BITCH! tomorrow, I'm feeling better about it. :D
 
DVS said:
So, are you saying this is a case of you say tomato and I'll say tomato?
Nah, i just like putting stuff up there for people to click and have the chit scared of them when the computer talks back at them.
DVS said:

Oh, and did it say which way Hoover pronounced it, by chance?
You know the answer to that ... any damned way he pleased.
bridgeburner said:
Grammar Gods forbid that I ever have to accept nuke-u-lar ...
i'm going to pronounce it à la Whoopi Goldberg from now on ... NEWK-a-lure.
 
bridgeburner said:
I think it's a word-meld between mischievous and devious.


----and if I were really any damn good I'd know a proper term for "word-meld".


-B


"Portmanteau," (two words whose sounds and meanings are blended to form a new word) attributed by the O.E.D. to C. L. Dodgson.
 
makes my eyes bleed

Should have. Would have. Could have.

Not should of, would of or could of.



shay
 
Re: makes my eyes bleed

shaymless said:
Should have. Would have. Could have.

Not should of, would of or could of.



shay

Should've, would've and could've, however, are legal contractions.
 
bouquiniste said:
"Portmanteau," (two words whose sounds and meanings are blended to form a new word) attributed by the O.E.D. to C. L. Dodgson.

That's right! I had completely forgotten that. Of course I never understood why we'd use the French word for "suitcase" to describe itself. "Portmanteau" is a portmanteau made up of porter - "to carry" and manteau - "coat". I mean, it makes as much sense to call such words "raincoats" or "babysitters"......well, except that it sounds better in French.


-B
 
bridgeburner said:
That's right! I had completely forgotten that. Of course I never understood why we'd use the French word for "suitcase" to describe itself. "Portmanteau" is a portmanteau made up of porter - "to carry" and manteau - "coat". I mean, it makes as much sense to call such words "raincoats" or "babysitters"......well, except that it sounds better in French.


-B


Well, actually the word, "portmanteau," has come to mean several things, but initially referred to a divided folio which opened and closed to reveal two distinct sections, not unlike an artist's portfolio. That aside, I suspect that Dodgson's use of the word as a descriptor was a portmanteau in itself - or at least a veiled entendre. While the root we ascribe to the word comes from Middle French, the "port" portion stems from the Latin, "portatio - portationis" which Ovid (in The Tristia, I believe) used as an entendre for, "to convey a meaning," as opposed to physically conveying or carrying something. Beyond that, I have an hunch (no, not like Quasimodo) that Dodgson was further playing on the roots, "mantelum," and, "mantica;" the first being a cape or cloak, and the second being a wallet - something which unfolds to reval what's inside. Just my two cents, now further devalued by the rising Euro.
 
Thanks Bouquiniste! I love learning such tidbits. You never know when they'll be useful!

-B
 
Wow, I see we are diverging into pronunciation here. ("Pronunciation", in good Kiwi fashion, is pronounced "prunciation". :D )

Just to rub a little dirt on DVS' nose... not only do we non-American-English speakers add the letter "u" to many words, but we also use the letter "s" instead of "z". Historically, those two letters were interchangable, so I don't believe either is more correct than the other.

What annoys me, though, is when I see the word "laser" spelled with a "z".
 
You're right, as an acronym Laser would have to be spelt with an S. Never thought about that.
 
Here's another weird one for you. The American spelling is "dispatch", but the English is "despatch". Perhaps it's due to a difference in pronunciation?

Oh, and speaking of "ironic" -- I have a friend who uses the word "ironical" and it drives me bananas!
 
FungiUg said:
Here's another weird one for you. The American spelling is "dispatch", but the English is "despatch". Perhaps it's due to a difference in pronunciation?

Oh, and speaking of "ironic" -- I have a friend who uses the word "ironical" and it drives me bananas!


In the proper context, "ironical," is perfectly acceptable - as an identifier referring to something or someone whose style embodies irony - as opposed to, "EnRonical," which is just plain dissembling.

;)
 
According to Websters, "ironic" and "ironical" are actually synonymous. So you can legitimately use one where you use the other.

Sometimes you just have to love the English language... :D
 
FungiUg said:
According to Websters, "ironic" and "ironical" are actually synonymous. So you can legitimately use one where you use the other.
Then, we could say that's rather ironical, isn't it.
 
Re: Re: Re: makes my eyes bleed

Kajira Callista said:
hmmm and i always thought that was
shoulda, woulda, coulda *shrug*
In my neck of the woods, those are pronounced shouldja, wouldja and couldja.

Used in a sentence...

PA "Ma, couldja get me 'nother beer?"

MA "Shouldja be drankin' so much on Sunday, Pa?"

PA "How wouldja like me to kick ya' on inta Monday, Ma?"
 
Last edited:
bouquiniste said:
In the proper context, "ironical," is perfectly acceptable - as an identifier referring to something or someone whose style embodies irony - as opposed to, "EnRonical," which is just plain dissembling.

;)
Were you referring to Enron, and am I the last to get the joke?
 
DVS said:
Were you referring to Enron, and am I the last to get the joke?


The reference was to Enron - just a little poke at their, "dissembling," which the O.E.D. offers as the third definition for, "ironical" - "dissembling; feigned; pretended." My secondary comment, "in the proper context," had nothing to do with the Enron debacle, and tertiarily there was no underlying entendre based upon Greenspan's "iron-nickel" analogy. Honest. I'm a very simple guy.
 
Back
Top