ellinor (ellinor) wrote,
ellinor
ellinor

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Join our linguistic revolution! Bwahahaha.

Merriam-Webster's online area has a feature about its (editors'?) "favorite" words that are not in the dictionary but, perhaps, should be. Words like "ginormous" and "woot." With the exception of "woot," most of these fall into the category of words made by conjoining two others, from which a combined meaning emerges. Like "ginormous."

To put this into terms that only a sliver of my audience will understand, I see such conjoined coinages as a little like the "x+y" action trivia. Relatively easy to generate, usually effective, often inspired, but occasionally lazy and not always the most rewarding. That's why the "sestalogy" revolution from my last post pleases me so. It's a word the language needs, made using sound lingustic principles rather than straight conjunction. But I'm not above a good conjoined word when it's called for. And there is a bit of a metaphysical question here, as the entire etymology of the English language could be seen as a process of conjoining word bases, according to "sound lingusitic principles." My favorite example of this, (which I thought I coined while I was studying etymology 19 (!!) years ago, but apparently it already existed) is "cyanuria." It's a condition that I have not heard of outside the film The Madness of King George, but even if it didn't exist, it would be obvious from the word's bases that the patient's wee is blue. So perhaps nearly all English words, and by extension, all neologisms, are conjunctions of a sort. I'll have to think on that.

But I stray from the point. The point is that several new words have come my way yesterday and today (I think I have coined them, although I wouldn't be surprised if someone else had, by coincidence, done so before me), and I thought I'd share, because if I don't share, there's no possibility that my lingusitic minions will rise up and take over the world. Okay, there's no chance of that happening even if I do share, but I'm sharing anyway, dammit.

Rumpbot: n. A robot that likes rear ends. Not necessarily in a dirty way, but the dirty way is not precluded. Could also be used to describe a cybernetic proctologist.

Frentic: adj. Having a large number of disparate things to do in a very short time, in a way that makes one want to wave one's hands over one's head muppet-style. (A conjunction, of sorts, of frantic and frenetic). Has nothing to do with the band Frente.

Typologism: n. A new word created by dint of typographical error. (Like frentic, supra, which was almost certainly a colleague's typo that I ran with). As I understand it, the origin of the entire 1337 pseudo-language is a series of phoneticisms and typologisms. My favorite thing about 1337 is that in certain circles, it has become a spoken language despite its origins at the keyboard. (See "woot," above, which has entered the lexicon even to the extent that Merriam-Webster recognizes it.) D00d, that r0xx0r.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 7 comments