utterly useless words

[cosmicsweety]

New subject: What in the world does tuberculosising mean??

I can't even find that one when I look it up. The act of having tuberculosis??

[jeepiegirl]

Right? Here's another: COENZYMATICALLY

[bwt1213]

By means of coenzymes? Sounds good to me.

[jeepiegirl]

Sure- at a conference where a biologist gives a seminar on coenzymes it could be crucial. Perhaps does not fit in a useless word category.

[dannyb]

How about a word so useless it is not considered to be a word here in WordTwist: Nage. It is considered "too French". Here in America nage is more often used to refer to the flavored poaching/steaming liquid or the broth used as a sauce than used as the the French technique "ala nage". So the other day when I served poached halibut sprinkled with tomato powder served in a tomato water, saffron, fennel nage. I had to tell my wife and guests that what they are eating doesn't exist in WordTwist land, but if I served the same halibut on a gelee made from fish fumet it wouldn't be "too French" and it would be acceptable. Go figure.

[tawantinsuyo]

Overfluentnesses? Even overfluent. Huh?

Tried to look it up. Nothing.

If you can't find a definition for the base... hmm.

Overflowing? Maybe.

Can't imagine it having anything to do with fluency. Seems the goal is to gain that effortless flow necessary in public speaking, sports, reading, art, singing, factory production--just about anything. Including Wordtwist.

OED has it: "Excessively fluent." Which is hardly surprising. :-)
The most recent example it quotes is from 2006:

A. Karpf Human Voice iii. 46

We may all be actors, but the over-fluent voice draws uncomfortable attention to the degree of performance.

It also has "over-fluency" (thus, hyphenated), but not overfluentness.

[tawantinsuyo]

Funny you should mention it.

Check out my avatar--that's a toad I caught in my back yard a few years ago and I made a pet out of him. He died, so I guess now I'm toadless

The OED gives only two examples of usage and both refer to gardens. Here's one: "When the garden was dug..it was toadless."

[Naboka]

stinking_badges-3342606166.jpeg


"Dictionaries?! We ain't got no dictionaires. We don't have to show you no stinking dictionaries."

Ever wonder how many words are added to the language every year?

Or how many words become obsolete?

Or how often the meanings of existing words are subtly or flagrantly changed?

The wife and I watch a lot of Home and Garden TV. People come into houses and complain that it's "so 90's!" A few episodes later the house hunters are swooning over craftsman style homes, or midcetury modern. Apparently, the age of a particular architectural style isn't the issue. Even log cabins have made a comeback.

Grey with luxury vinyl flooring was the rage of house flippers recently, but it's beginning to see a backlash.

Dictionaries aren't really the authoritarian dictators of language. Dictionaries depend on us and how we use language. On the meanings we've given a word, regardless of what the last edition of Webster said.

Individuals might either coin or use a particular word that manages to be recorded in a dictionary. That it's in the dictionary doesn't stop us from rolling our eyes over how silly, pompous, ridiculous or useless that word is.

There's an endless stream of silly, pompous, ridiculous and useless people who require words to suit their inclinations.

I, personally, can consider a diamond-collared, pink-ribboned chihuahua cringeworthy. Give me a slobbering mutt that loves me and rolls in the dirt.

Words can be in the dictionary. Words can be defined in the dictionary. And still be useless or ridiculous.

The wonderful thing about minds is we can change them. Where once we scorned avocado green refrigerators we can suddenly see the charm and install one in the game room.

If bad can be redefined as exceptionally good we really are not slaves to the factory bosses of language.

After recovering from the shock that OED has given valididity to diamond-collared, pink-ribboned chihuahuas...

we can go back to scratching inappropriately

burping, farting and snorting.

And letting the mutt lick our faces.

Nothing like being loved unconditionally.

[2cute]

Here's a new one (well to me)

Screen Shot 2023-02-16 at 4.01.54 PM.png

Unsenses = to not use your senses.

I must admit I've never used this word. If I couldn't smell or see I wouldn't say it was due to my unsenses. Then again, how could I unsense something? I would have to use @ least one of them to experience anything. Hmm ...

[lalatan]

Unsenses = to not use your senses.

I must admit I've never used this word. If I couldn't smell or see I wouldn't say it was due to my unsenses. Then again, how could I unsense something? I would have to use @ least one of them to experience anything. Hmm ...

Unsenses seems like nonsenses to me. I couldn't resist...

[tawantinsuyo]

<snip>
Dictionaries aren't really the authoritarian dictators of language. Dictionaries depend on us and how we use language. On the meanings we've given a word, regardless of what the last edition of Webster said.

Individuals might either coin or use a particular word that manages to be recorded in a dictionary. That it's in the dictionary doesn't stop us from rolling our eyes over how silly, pompous, ridiculous or useless that word is.

There's an endless stream of silly, pompous, ridiculous and useless people who require words to suit their inclinations.

I, personally, can consider a diamond-collared, pink-ribboned chihuahua cringeworthy. Give me a slobbering mutt that loves me and rolls in the dirt.

Words can be in the dictionary. Words can be defined in the dictionary. And still be useless or ridiculous.

<snip>

After recovering from the shock that OED has given valididity to diamond-collared, pink-ribboned chihuahuas...

<snip>

Totally agree that words can be in the dictionary and still be useless or ridiculous. Precisely because, as you said earlier in your post, dictionaries depend on how we use language.
I cited the OED only because you said you had been unable to find "overfluent" in a dictionary. That piqued my curiosity so I went a-searching and shared what I found.

BTW, I share your aversion to diamond-collared, pink-ribboned chihuahuas. :-)

[Naboka]

Totally agree that words can be in the dictionary and still be useless or ridiculous. Precisely because, as you said earlier in your post, dictionaries depend on how we use language.
I cited the OED only because you said you had been unable to find "overfluent" in a dictionary. That piqued my curiosity so I went a-searching and shared what I found.

BTW, I share your aversion to diamond-collared, pink-ribboned chihuahuas. :-)

Laugh.

Appreciate your diligence.

Probably wasted since I was just being lazy and "looking up words" is shorthand for seeing what comes up quickly on an internet search.

And "not being able to find" seldom connects to the reality of actually searching for the object.

We tell the kindergarteners, "don't use my brain, use yours. I ain't gonna do your work for you." Amazing how effective that is in creating active problem solvers.

Actually have the OED and lots of other dictionaries. The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia was (and probably stil is) my favorite. But, I've long ago stopped looking at the paper versions.

Nor have I bothered to purchase any digital versions.

299316591.0.x-1193589973.jpeg

That's an internet pic of the Centuries. (See, I'm far too lazy to get off my butt and search through the boxes in storage to take a pic of my own.) Spent hundreds of hours enjoying their company and the ideas they shared.

A cautionary hint: the author is prone to histrionic rampage. Why? Probably because the Muses are bored and enjoy the drama of human hysteria. So, one would benefit from taking little of what he writes with anything approaching seriousness.

Seriousnesses?

[NukeProofCakePops]

Hypersehroalization?
Shamelessly and inaccurately throwing some PIE in there with the Greek for a linguistic tiropita, if you will.

Though on the subject of useless words, I just found "DEMATHEMATISATIONS (34 pts.)" . Though on further research, it seems like it does have use in a specific branch of philosophy--but I doubt the pluralization sees much use, given the part of speech.

[crazykate]

I just found a word through a mis-swipe (swipo?)
ANIMAT - defined as an artificial animal. I guess it's a portmanteau of animal and automat. But is it really necessary?

[lalatan]

I just found a word through a mis-swipe (swipo?)

I love the word you coined: swipo. That could be useful.