Scrabble dictionary
Opus the Penguin
reading this in alt.fan.cecil-adams.]
I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble dictionary. I
agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary as an English
word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when people study a
dictionary to learn collocations of letters they never knew were
words, didn't pick up from any of their reading, don't know the
definition of, never use, and will probably never see in the wild.
The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part of
their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The person who
uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming the system and I
don't want to play with them.
Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a perfectly
good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the
Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses "exilings".
Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on Medieval
history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars punctuated by
massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now, stylistically, I'd make
all three of those nouns singular. But is it really *wrong* to say
"exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even a word?
I understand why a dictionary wouldn't include the form. The plural
of "exiling" is obviously constructed and doesn't require a separate
listing.
I want my 101 points.
--
Opus the Penguin
Cats and "acts normally" are a nearly tangential intersection on a
VERY enlarged Venn diagram. - Robert Crowe
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Jon M
<opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble dictionary. I
>agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary as an English
>word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when people study a
>dictionary to learn collocations of letters they never knew were
>words, didn't pick up from any of their reading, don't know the
>definition of, never use, and will probably never see in the wild.
>
>The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part of
>their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The person who
>uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming the system and I
>don't want to play with them.
How do you feel about chess players who study books of chess openings?
I don't see a lot of difference between the two. I don't want to play
with either of those people, but that's because they're playing a
couple of levels above the best I can do. I don't mind losing; it's
the being sneered at that I can do without.
Disclosure: Twice in my life, I have been the kind of chess player
that studies chess openings. What discouraged me both times was the
fact that it's a lot of work to think about chess for an hour or so
every day. And the realization that I would never be more than a
sparring partner for the good players. At least with backgammon, I
can blame the dice when I lose.
Jon M
Les Albert
wrote:
>>I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble dictionary. I
>>agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary as an English
>>word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when people study a
>>dictionary to learn collocations of letters they never knew were
>>words, didn't pick up from any of their reading, don't know the
>>definition of, never use, and will probably never see in the wild.
>>The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part of
>>their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The person who
>>uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming the system and I
>>don't want to play with them.
>How do you feel about chess players who study books of chess openings?
>I don't see a lot of difference between the two. I don't want to play
>with either of those people, but that's because they're playing a
>couple of levels above the best I can do. I don't mind losing; it's
>the being sneered at that I can do without.
I used to read books about chess openings, and none of them had any
chapters about sneering at the loser.
Les
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble
>>dictionary. I agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary
>>as an English word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when
>>people study a dictionary to learn collocations of letters they
>>never knew were words, didn't pick up from any of their reading,
>>don't know the definition of, never use, and will probably never
>>see in the wild.
>>
>>The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part
>>of their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The
>>person who uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming
>>the system and I don't want to play with them.
>
> How do you feel about chess players who study books of chess
> openings? I don't see a lot of difference between the two. I
> don't want to play with either of those people, but that's because
> they're playing a couple of levels above the best I can do. I
> don't mind losing; it's the being sneered at that I can do
> without.
>
Books on chess openings seem different to me. But I don't understand
chess. I'm terrible at it. If chess were an intelligence test, I'd be
a certified moron.
--
Opus the Penguin
And don't get me started on my inexperience with pork products. -
Boron Elgar
Les Albert
>I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble dictionary. I
>agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary as an English
>word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when people study a
>dictionary to learn collocations of letters they never knew were
>words, didn't pick up from any of their reading, don't know the
>definition of, never use, and will probably never see in the wild.
>The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part of
>their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The person who
>uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming the system and I
>don't want to play with them.
Maybe you mean gaming the game. What is there about reading a word in
a story that makes the person more respectful then if that person read
the word in a list? Do you feel the same about crossword puzzle
solvers who know all the obscure definitions not because they are part
of their reading vocabulary, but because they saw them in previous
puzzles? You may like to show off your intellectual abilities by
using only words that are part of your reading vocabulary, but the
gamers may like to show off their memory skills. They have a
competitive spirit.
Les
Ulo Melton
>Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
>Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a perfectly
>good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the
>Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
>
>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses "exilings".
>Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on Medieval
>history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars punctuated by
>massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now, stylistically, I'd make
>all three of those nouns singular. But is it really *wrong* to say
>"exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even a word?
Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the act of
banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already serves that
purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence you quoted, and
you have the same meaning and have to make your beak form only two
syllables instead of three.
>I understand why a dictionary wouldn't include the form. The plural
>of "exiling" is obviously constructed and doesn't require a separate
>listing.
>
>I want my 101 points.
EXILING already has seven letters. Aren't there any words you can hang
it on in parallel and get your bingo?
--
Ulo Melton
http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure
"Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator
in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
Peter Boulding
wrote in <8vetu39v6fdtdqvmm...@4ax.com>:
>>Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
>>Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a perfectly
>>good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the
>>Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
>>
>>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses "exilings".
>>Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on Medieval
>>history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars punctuated by
>>massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now, stylistically, I'd make
>>all three of those nouns singular. But is it really *wrong* to say
>>"exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even a word?
As far as I can see it's a valid gerund and should therefore be permissible
whether or not it appears in a dictionary. The fact that dictionaries are
not required to, and do not, contain every possible ending for every verb
does not render those endings invalid.
>
>Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the act of
>banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already serves that
>purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence you quoted, and
>you have the same meaning and have to make your beak form only two
>syllables instead of three.
This may seem obvious to you but I'm not at all sure that either the exiles
or those performing the exilings would agree.
--
Regards, Peter Boulding
p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal music & images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music
Bob Ward
<opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses "exilings".
>Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on Medieval
>history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars punctuated by
>massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now, stylistically, I'd make
>all three of those nouns singular. But is it really *wrong* to say
>"exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even a word?
It would seem that plural is appropriate, assuming that there were
multiple targets of such punctuation involved.
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin wrote:
>
>>Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
>>Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a
>>perfectly good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me
>>but not for the Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not
>>"EXILINGS". Why not?
>>
>>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses
>>"exilings". Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on
>>Medieval history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars
>>punctuated by massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now,
>>stylistically, I'd make all three of those nouns singular. But is
>>it really *wrong* to say "exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even
>>a word?
>
> Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the
> act of banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already
> serves that purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence
> you quoted, and you have the same meaning and have to make your
> beak form only two syllables instead of three.
>
That's interesting as a style note, but irrelevant to the question of
whether "exilings" is a word.
In any event, I disagree. Think about the difference between "beating"
and "beatings" in a similar sentence. There's a nuance between the
two choices.
>>I understand why a dictionary wouldn't include the form. The
>>plural of "exiling" is obviously constructed and doesn't require a
>>separate listing.
>>
>>I want my 101 points.
>
> EXILING already has seven letters. Aren't there any words you can
> hang it on in parallel and get your bingo?
>
Nope.
--
Opus the Penguin
I too generally dislike inspirational or religous or irreligious
messages accompanying my purchase of fungible consumer products. -
Richard R. Hershberger
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Opus the Penguin wrote:
>
> [NOTE: Cross-posted to alt.fan.cecil-adams and alt.usage.english. I'm
> reading this in alt.fan.cecil-adams.]
>
> I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble dictionary. I
> agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary as an English
> word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when people study a
> dictionary to learn collocations of letters they never knew were
> words, didn't pick up from any of their reading, don't know the
> definition of, never use, and will probably never see in the wild.
>
> The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part of
> their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The person who
> uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming the system and I
> don't want to play with them.
>
If you don't have a U, I think you'd be well served by memorizing
at least some of the list.
> Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
> Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a perfectly
> good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the
> Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
>
Is the S plural pleniproductive against gerunds in English? Is
"singings" a word? Why not? (If only real words are allowed in your
newsgroup, replace "pleniproductive" with "infinitely productive")
--
"Question, two men starving to death decide to eat their hair like
spaghetti. Is that funny?"
"Hmmm, well, it depends on if by funny you want to make people
laugh."
-+Eddie Izzard and Joanna Lumley, "The Cat's Meow"
N Jill Marsh
>EXILING already has seven letters. Aren't there any words you can hang
>it on in parallel and get your bingo?
Bingo? I thought this was about Scrabble.
nj"now confused again"m
--
Welcome, stranger, to the humble neighbourhoods.
art...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
> Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a perfectly
> good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the
> Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
>
> I want my 101 points.
You're just waiting to exile.
Ulo Melton
>Ulo Melton (melt...@sewergator.com) wrote:
>
>> Opus the Penguin wrote:
>>
>>>Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
>>>Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a
>>>perfectly good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me
>>>but not for the Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not
>>>"EXILINGS". Why not?
>>>
>>>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses
>>>"exilings". Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on
>>>Medieval history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars
>>>punctuated by massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now,
>>>stylistically, I'd make all three of those nouns singular. But is
>>>it really *wrong* to say "exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even
>>>a word?
>>
>> Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the
>> act of banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already
>> serves that purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence
>> you quoted, and you have the same meaning and have to make your
>> beak form only two syllables instead of three.
>
>That's interesting as a style note, but irrelevant to the question of
>whether "exilings" is a word.
I'm saying it may not be recognized as a word because most people don't
see the need for it, with a word signifying the same thing already
available. Googling "exilings" (in quotes, so Google doesn't stem it),
returns a meager 618 hits. The first hit is a Google Groups post from
one Opus the Penguin, made today.
>In any event, I disagree. Think about the difference between "beating"
>and "beatings" in a similar sentence. There's a nuance between the
>two choices.
The same as the nuance between "exile" and "exiles," I'd say. There just
isn't a perceived need for "exiling" as a noun. Once there is, the
lexicographers will take note, "exiling" will get its own entry as a
noun (just as "beating" does now) and you can play your bingo. You may
have to stall for a while.
The OED actually does recognize it as a noun, but the most recent
example is "1635 SIBBES Soul's Confl. (1638) 3 His exiling from Gods
house," so it may be that it's just gone out of style these last few
centuries. Take heart, all fashions come round again.
James Silverton
(PDT):
??>> Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here
??>> at Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray.
??>> There's a perfectly good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS".
??>> It works for me but not for the Scrabble dictionary.
??>> "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
??>> I want my 101 points.
For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only
dictionary we used was the one we agreed on before we started a
game. There was not a self-appointed official one. That's a bit
like the "Official Frisbee Association"!
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
art...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> art...@yahoo.com wrote on Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:16:42 -0700
> (PDT):
>
> ??>> Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here
> ??>> at Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray.
> ??>> There's a perfectly good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS".
> ??>> It works for me but not for the Scrabble dictionary.
> ??>> "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
>
> ??>> I want my 101 points.
>
> For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only
> dictionary we used was the one we agreed on before we started a
> game. There was not a self-appointed official one. That's a bit
> like the "Official Frisbee Association"!
There is a World Flying Disc Federation
James Silverton
<art...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dc670f1d-33fd-43a3...@8g2000hsu.googlegroups.com...
If so, it is ad hoc, self-appointed and to be treated with the
respect it deserves!
--
Jim Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
bill van
N Jill Marsh <njm...@storm.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:02:27 -0800, Ulo Melton
> <melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
>
> >EXILING already has seven letters. Aren't there any words you can hang
> >it on in parallel and get your bingo?
>
> Bingo? I thought this was about Scrabble.
>
> nj"now confused again"m
Could be regional. I wasn't familiar with that usage when I lived in
Alberta or Ontario, but I'm pretty sure it was in use here in Vancouver
by the early 1980s when I got here. It's the act of playing all seven of
your letters at once, and/or the 50 point bonus.
--
bill
remove my country for e-mail
Mark Brader
> Bingo? I thought this was about Scrabble.
Apparently many Scrabble players use "bingo" as slang for a play of
all 7 tiles, earning the 50-point bonus.
--
Mark Brader diagnostic: n. Someone who's not sure
Toronto about science and evolution, either.
m...@vex.net --Steve Summit
Mark Brader
> For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only
> dictionary we used was the one we agreed on before we started a
> game.
Yep. In my house it's the Random House Unabridged.
> There was not a self-appointed official one.
But now -- can you say "marketing tie-in"?
Anyway, tournament Scrabble players needed a single word list, at least
in any particular organization. That was the original reason.
--
Mark Brader That would be the opposite of "non idiotic",
Toronto assuming there's some good word for that.
m...@vex.net --Ken Jennings
Mr C
> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:56:19 -0700, Jon M <faceonm...@omnicast.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 29 Mar 2008 18:28:13 GMT, Opus the Penguin
> >>I understand both sides of the argument on the Scrabble dictionary. I
> >>agree that if a word is in any standard dictionary as an English
> >>word, it counts. But it seems to spoil the game when people study a
> >>dictionary to learn collocations of letters they never knew were
> >>words, didn't pick up from any of their reading, don't know the
> >>definition of, never use, and will probably never see in the wild.
> >>The person who uses QI because they've seen it used and it's part of
> >>their reading vocabulary--that person has my respect. The person who
> >>uses QI because they memorized a list is just gaming the system and I
> >>don't want to play with them.
> >How do you feel about chess players who study books of chess openings?
> >I don't see a lot of difference between the two. I don't want to play
> >with either of those people, but that's because they're playing a
> >couple of levels above the best I can do. I don't mind losing; it's
> >the being sneered at that I can do without.
>
> I used to read books about chess openings, and none of them had any
> chapters about sneering at the loser.
>
and The Art of Chess (which leads backwards from endgame to consider
the preceding stages) sit on my shelf now. I used to have, but cannot
find, the best aid to learning chess, I probably lent it to a
student. It was a sleeve thing that had cards with all the moves of
chess matches by Anatoly Karpov. You pulled the card up one notch so
that each successive move showed in a little window. And you played
the game, trying to make your best move, then comparing to what the
players did. Or just go through and watch the game.
Sneering is not a term I would use, but pulling the Queen's Gambit in
five moves or less deserves some kind of attention.
Mr C
Mr C
Bob Ward
<melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
>
>I'm saying it may not be recognized as a word because most people don't
>see the need for it, with a word signifying the same thing already
>available. Googling "exilings" (in quotes, so Google doesn't stem it),
>returns a meager 618 hits. The first hit is a Google Groups post from
>one Opus the Penguin, made today.
So, if your opponent had just played tiles spelling FLAMMABLE", and
you had "IN", would you play or pass?
Bill Turlock
Likely the precursor to the FSM contingent
Greg Goss
>Books on chess openings seem different to me. But I don't understand
>chess. I'm terrible at it. If chess were an intelligence test, I'd be
>a certified moron.
A group of friends in the eighties played chess socially. It bothered
me that I could pretty regularly beat Bill, and that Bill could pretty
regularly beat Jim and that Jim could pretty regularly beat me.
I try to apply logic to the world and the question "who is the best
chess player" shoves my brain into some kind of overload.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Greg Goss
>Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the act of
>banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already serves that
>purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence you quoted, and
>you have the same meaning and have to make your beak form only two
>syllables instead of three.
No. Exiles is a group of people. Exilings are a group of actions.
Completely different definitions.
Jerry Bauer
(in article <658o8rF...@mid.individual.net>):
I played chess socially in high school. The general format was two
players and about eight kibitzers. The kibitzing was egalitarian;
they (or we, if I were one) would switch sides with every move, and
"help" whomever was the one to make the next move.
These chess games were played during brief breaks between classes,
and during lunch. The goal was primarily fun, rather than
competition, with a subgoal to play as many games as possible. The
goal of the kibitzing squad was to anticipate as many plys ahead as
we (or they) could, and thus accelerate the play.
The language was Hawai'ian pidgin, with a chess vocabulary overlay.
The word for "capture" was "eat", and a knight was a "horse", of
course, of course. A bishop could eat a queen, without any
adolescent-male innuendo. And a queen could eat a horse, of course,
of course.
Sometimes we played a Japanese variant, in which the pieces lacked
differentiating color. The pieces had direction, and each player's
pieces faced his opponents. When one player's piece would "eat" one
of the other's, the captured piece would be turned around and placed
on the first rank, becoming a part of the first player's team.
--
Jerry Randal Bauer
Peter Moylan
> For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only dictionary we
> used was the one we agreed on before we started a game. There was not a
> self-appointed official one. That's a bit like the "Official Frisbee
> Association"!
Most dictionaries don't list regular plurals. The real question that the
OP needs to consider is whether the dictionary that was agreed upon for
his/her game lists "exiling" as a noun.
My wife always beat me at Scrabble because we had two agreed
dictionaries, and her vocabulary in English was better than mine in French.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
bill van
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> Ulo Melton <melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
>
> >Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the act of
> >banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already serves that
> >purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence you quoted, and
> >you have the same meaning and have to make your beak form only two
> >syllables instead of three.
>
> No. Exiles is a group of people. Exilings are a group of actions.
> Completely different definitions.
Then "exilings" would require a completely different entry in the
dictionary. But it does not have one. Exiles can mean not only the
people, but also the act of forcing them into exile, and the period of
their absence. So there is no need for a noun "exilings."
Ulo Melton
Play. There's no question about the wordidity of "inflammable". It's
recognized by everybody's dic and is even a couple hundred years older
than "flammable".
Ulo Melton
>On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:02:27 -0800, Ulo Melton <melt...@sewergator.com>
>wrote in <8vetu39v6fdtdqvmm...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
>>>Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a perfectly
>>>good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the
>>>Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why not?
>>>
>>>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses "exilings".
>>>Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on Medieval
>>>history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars punctuated by
>>>massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now, stylistically, I'd make
>>>all three of those nouns singular. But is it really *wrong* to say
>>>"exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even a word?
>
>As far as I can see it's a valid gerund and should therefore be permissible
>whether or not it appears in a dictionary. The fact that dictionaries are
>not required to, and do not, contain every possible ending for every verb
>does not render those endings invalid.
The dictionary determines whether a word is valid in Scrabulous. If it
doesn't recognize the word you've played, it will rudely exile that word
from the board. If Opus wants to get around that, he can start a game as
a challenge game, which bypasses the Scrabulous dic. The players can
agree at the start to allow any word formed according to common English
morphology, an agreement that will be sorely tested when Opus plays
EXILINGS for 101 points.
>>Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the act of
>>banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already serves that
>>purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence you quoted, and
>>you have the same meaning and have to make your beak form only two
>>syllables instead of three.
>
>This may seem obvious to you but I'm not at all sure that either the exiles
>or those performing the exilings would agree.
It's probably not high on their list of things to worry about.
James Silverton
message news:13uuj8f...@corp.supernews.com...
> On 30/03/08 11:35, James Silverton wrote:
>
>> a game. There was not a self-appointed official one. That's a
>> bit like the "Official Frisbee Association"!
>
> Most dictionaries don't list regular plurals. The real
> question that the
> OP needs to consider is whether the dictionary that was agreed
> upon for
> his/her game lists "exiling" as a noun.
>
> My wife always beat me at Scrabble because we had two agreed
> dictionaries, and her vocabulary in English was better than
> mine in French.
>
I don't really object since the topic is quite interesting but
Peter's post makes me appear to be the OP, which I am not.
Peter Moylan
> "Peter Moylan" <pe...@DIESPAMMERSDIEpmoylan.org> wrote in message
> news:13uuj8f...@corp.supernews.com...
>> On 30/03/08 11:35, James Silverton wrote:
>>
>>> For the many years that I have played Scrabble, the only dictionary
>>> we used was the one we agreed on before we started a game. There was
>>> not a self-appointed official one. That's a bit like the "Official
>>> Frisbee Association"!
>>
>> Most dictionaries don't list regular plurals. The real question that the
>> OP needs to consider is whether the dictionary that was agreed upon for
>> his/her game lists "exiling" as a noun.
>
> post makes me appear to be the OP, which I am not.
>
undersnipping that's taken over in so many other threads.
Mike Lyle
> On 30/03/08 11:35, James Silverton wrote:
>
>> For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only dictionary we
>> used was the one we agreed on before we started a game. There was
>> not a self-appointed official one. That's a bit like the "Official
>> Frisbee Association"!
>
> Most dictionaries don't list regular plurals. The real question that
> the OP needs to consider is whether the dictionary that was agreed
> upon for his/her game lists "exiling" as a noun.
>
> My wife always beat me at Scrabble because we had two agreed
> dictionaries, and her vocabulary in English was better than mine in
> French.
We used to have a system of handicapping under which the youngest child
was allowed to use Welsh words as well as English. (At an early stage,
on a train on the way to England for a visit I was winding her up by
speaking my very juvenile Welsh, and she said "Dad! Stop talking
English!")
--
Mike.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Jerry Bauer
(in article <13uv2m4...@corp.supernews.com>):
> Sorry
N Jill Marsh
wrote:
>In article <h5itu398jonps90ap...@4ax.com>,
> N Jill Marsh <njm...@storm.ca> wrote:
>
>> Bingo? I thought this was about Scrabble.
>
>Could be regional.
Well, it could be, and it could also be the most commonly used word in
Scrabble. They'd both have pretty much the same level of familiarity
for me.
> It's the act of playing all seven of
>your letters at once, and/or the 50 point bonus.
Thanks.
nj"50 point bonuses? Those coloured squares mean stuff too?"m
Dover Beach
news:0001HW.C4147DAD...@nntp.earthlink.net:
> I played chess socially in high school.
You didn't have a problem with it or nothin'. You could've quit any
time.
--
Dover
ZBicyclist
>
> As far as I can see it's a valid gerund and should therefore be
> permissible whether or not it appears in a dictionary. The fact that
> dictionaries are not required to, and do not, contain every possible
> ending for every verb does not render those endings invalid.
Sure, but the Scrabble dictionary is just a list of valid words. It's really
just a big lookup table, and if it returns "not found" the word isn't valid.
It's a way to "bright-line" the game.
When we used to play, we'd just use a standard Merriam-Webster Collegiate
dictionary. The main reason was that we already owned one. The second reason
was to see how close the person putting down the letters could get to the
actual definition. I don't remember arguments about standard pluralization
or verb tense creation. We wouldn't have even bothered to look "exilings"
up.
ZBicyclist
> <art...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:dc670f1d-33fd-43a3...@8g2000hsu.googlegroups.com...
>> On Mar 29, 8:35 pm, "James Silverton"
>> <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not>
>> wrote:
>>> art...@yahoo.com wrote on Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:16:42 -0700
>>> (PDT):
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only
>>> dictionary we used was the one we agreed on before we started
>>> a
>>> game. There was not a self-appointed official one. That's a
>>> bit
>>> like the "Official Frisbee Association"!
>>
>> There is a World Flying Disc Federation
>
> If so, it is ad hoc, self-appointed and to be treated with the
> respect it deserves!
The World Flying Disc Federaion is the group that publishes the rules for
Ultimate (usually called Ultimate Frisbee). disc golf (usually called
Frisbee Golf), etc..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Flying_Disc_Federation
The World Flying Disc Federation is the FIFA of Frisbee.
--
Mike Kruger
"You have to be careful if you are reckless." - Richard M. Daley
Peter Boulding
<pe...@DIESPAMMERSDIEpmoylan.org> wrote in
<13uuj8f...@corp.supernews.com>:
>Most dictionaries don't list regular plurals. The real question that the
>OP needs to consider is whether the dictionary that was agreed upon for
>his/her game lists "exiling" as a noun.
Agreed. But:
On that basis, if the players are using the online Oxford they will be able
to use both "exiling" and, since the Oxford lists this as a "verbal noun"
(in other words a gerund), "exilings", whereas if they're using the NSOED
(the Shorter Oxford on CD) it's not listed, so our players won't be able to
use either. Does anyone seriously want to challenge "exiling"?
And the NSOED doesn't generally list past participles, either, so our NSOED
players could arguably challenge "exiled" as well, on the basis that a
search on "exiled" draws a blank, even though it does appear in the
*examples* listed under "exile". (Note: the NSOED *does* list "exilement",
which IMO is a great deal worthier of challenge than "exilings".)
I suppose any competitive game has to have a set of rules that is capable of
resolving all disputes, but Scrabble would appear to have stepped beyond the
intended vocab territory and into the shortcomings and quirks of a specific
dictionary - thus spoiling the fun for all but the most irremediably
Scrabulous.[1]
[1] The NSOED admits that "exilement" is rare; how rare does it have to be
before a dictionary compiler can allow himself to conclude that its
occurrences were just the misuse of English by one or two authors? How many
times would other posters have to pick up on my "Scrabulous" before a
dictionary compiler would feel obliged to include it in his next edition?
--
Regards, Peter Boulding
p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal music & images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music
James Silverton
Z> James Silverton wrote:
??>> <art...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
??>>
news:dc670f1d-33fd-43a3...@8g2000hsu.googlegroups.com...
??>>> On Mar 29, 8:35 pm, "James Silverton"
??>>> <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not>
??>>> wrote:
??>>>> art...@yahoo.com wrote on Sat, 29 Mar 2008
17:16:42 -0700
??>>>> (PDT):
??>>>>
??>>>>>> Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting
??>>>>>> here at Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my
??>>>>>> tray. There's a perfectly good "S" to hang them on.
??>>>>>> "EXILINGS". It works for me but not for the Scrabble
??>>>>>> dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not "EXILINGS". Why
??>>>>>> not?
??>>>>
??>>>>>> I want my 101 points.
??>>>>
??>>>> For the many years that I haveplayed Scrabble, the only
??>>>> dictionary we used was the one we agreed on before we
??>>>> started a game. There was not a self-appointed official
??>>>> one. That's a bit like the "Official Frisbee
??>>>> Association"!
??>>>
??>>> There is a World Flying Disc Federation
??>>
??>> If so, it is ad hoc, self-appointed and to be treated with
??>> the respect it deserves!
Z> The World Flying Disc Federaion is the group that publishes
Z> the rules for Ultimate (usually called Ultimate Frisbee).
Z> disc golf (usually called Frisbee Golf), etc..
Z> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Flying_Disc_Federation
Z> The World Flying Disc Federation is the FIFA of Frisbee.
I totally refuse to take Frisbees seriously.
Scrabble is an occasional recreation to me but I know it is more
than that to some. Are there financial incentives? I guess, if
there is to be a World Championship of Scrabble, some World
Agreement on a dictionary would be necessary. The dictionary
that I use most often use, Chambers, lists both US and British
spellings; does the "Official Dictionary" do that? I have never
liked spelling out letters of the alphabet, like "ell" as a
general practice (I'm willing to accept British practice that
"L" is how it is spelled) but I've had to accept the longer
versions since I am usually outvoted by fellow players.
I don't have the rules handy but we never imposed a numerical
penalty for an unsuccessful spelling challenge. Are penalties
like that the rule in competition?
Peter Boulding
<billvan-3FDB33...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>:
>> No. Exiles is a group of people. Exilings are a group of actions.
>> Completely different definitions.
>
>Then "exilings" would require a completely different entry in the
>dictionary. But it does not have one. Exiles can mean not only the
>people, but also the act of forcing them into exile, and the period of
>their absence. So there is no need for a noun "exilings."
Not so. A gerund (what the Oxford calls a 'verbal noun') is a verb form;
it's valid whether or not a dictionary lists it. The fact that the NSOED
lists the verb "pull" but fails to list "pulling" as a noun has no effect on
the validity of the sentence "Pulling is an essential part of both tug o'
war and male adolescence."
In the case of "exile" you're on particularly weak ground, since all
appropriate usages listed in the Oxford - i.e. those referring the action
rather than to the object of that action - seem to refer to the action as
seen from the viewpoint of the object, whereas the 'verbal noun' "exiling"
refers to the transitive action.
Hactar
Can "exile" be a transitive verb?
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.mine.nu:81
LEO: Now is not a good time to photocopy your butt and staple it
to your boss' face, oh no. Eat a bucket of tuna-flavored pudding
and wash it down with a gallon of strawberry Quik. -- Weird Al
Peter Boulding
<k215c5-...@royalty.mine.nu>:
>Can "exile" be a transitive verb?
It's always transitive (with one rare exception given in the full Oxford -
"To be in exile" - their most recent example of which is dated 1621).
ZBicyclist
>
> I totally refuse to take Frisbees seriously.
Dissing discs, I see. That's not a well-rounded point of view.
Opus the Penguin
> In article
> <billvan-3FDB33...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>, bill
> van <bil...@shawcanada.ca> wrote:
>> In article <658oaqF...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Ulo Melton <melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies
>> > >the act of banishment from one's native land, and "exiles"
>> > >already serves that purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in
>> > >the sentence you quoted, and you have the same meaning and
>> > >have to make your beak form only two syllables instead of
>> > >three.
>> >
>> > No. Exiles is a group of people. Exilings are a group of
>> > actions. Completely different definitions.
>>
>> Then "exilings" would require a completely different entry in the
>> dictionary. But it does not have one. Exiles can mean not only
>> the people, but also the act of forcing them into exile, and the
>> period of their absence. So there is no need for a noun
>> "exilings."
>
> Can "exile" be a transitive verb?
>
That's what it is. I'm not sure how it could be INtransitive.
--
Opus the Penguin
Most of us don't store much fat in our heads. - bill van
Opus the Penguin
> When we used to play, we'd just use a standard Merriam-Webster
> Collegiate dictionary. The main reason was that we already owned
> one. The second reason was to see how close the person putting
> down the letters could get to the actual definition. I don't
> remember arguments about standard pluralization or verb tense
> creation. We wouldn't have even bothered to look "exilings" up.
>
Because it's obviously valid, right?
--
Opus the Penguin
Think what you will of the man, but you have to give him credit where
it's due - he got really sick. - One of the Bob Gearys
James Silverton
Z> James Silverton wrote:
??>>
??>> I totally refuse to take Frisbees seriously.
Z> Dissing discs, I see. That's not a well-rounded point of
Z> view.
LOL! There is rather an epidemic of puns on this ng (wrong term
since the thread is cross-posted). Who on earth is or was cecil
adams?
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<not.jim....@verizon.not> wrote:
> Who on earth is or was cecil
>adams?
alt.fan.cecil-adams FAQ
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/misc-facts/cecil-adams/
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
James Silverton
??>> Who on earth is or was cecil
??>> adams?
PDB> alt.fan.cecil-adams FAQ
PDB> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/misc-facts/cecil-adams/
Thanks, now I know and will avoid Marilyn vos Savant in a
different alias!
Hactar
It can be not-a-verb: "He lives in exile in Germany".
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.mine.nu:81
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert
ZBicyclist
> ZBicyclist (ZBicy...@excite.com) wrote:
>
>> When we used to play, we'd just use a standard Merriam-Webster
>> Collegiate dictionary. The main reason was that we already owned
>> one. The second reason was to see how close the person putting
>> down the letters could get to the actual definition. I don't
>> remember arguments about standard pluralization or verb tense
>> creation. We wouldn't have even bothered to look "exilings" up.
>>
>
> Because it's obviously valid, right?
We'd think so, but then scrabble was a pastime, not a blood sport. This
example seems right:
Boris was exiled to Irkutsk in 1935. Natasha was exiled to Tashkent in 1936.
These exilings had the effect of ...
Mark Brader
> I have never liked spelling out letters of the alphabet, like "ell"
Neither do I, but "ell" is legitimate anyway. It's also an obsolete
unit of length equal to 45 inches. Another meaning is a wing of a
building, but that's derived from the letter-name use, and I don't
think I've ever seen it actually used myself.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | This is Programming as a True Art Form, where style
m...@vex.net | is more important than correctness... --Pontus Hedman
Mark Brader
>>> Who on earth is or was cecil adams?
>> alt.fan.cecil-adams FAQ
>> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/misc-facts/cecil-adams/
> Thanks, now I know and will avoid Marilyn vos Savant in a
> different alias!
Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading. Many of his
columns are available at http://www.straightdope.com as well as
having been collected in book form.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Please correct error between chair and monitor."
m...@vex.net | -- James Baughn
ZBicyclist
> James Silverton and Peter Duncanson write:
>>>> Who on earth is or was cecil adams?
>
>>> alt.fan.cecil-adams FAQ
>>> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/misc-facts/cecil-adams/
>
>> Thanks, now I know and will avoid Marilyn vos Savant in a
>> different alias!
>
> Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading. Many of his
> columns are available at http://www.straightdope.com as well as
> having been collected in book form.
The whole "world's smartest human" is a put-on, possibly aimed as Ms. vos
Savant's overblown claim. Cecil is a pen name. The newsgroup
alt.fan.cecil-adams just exists, and generally has little to do with Cecil
at all.
Jerry Bauer
(in article <Xns9A716E5DF5C6Cmo...@130.133.1.4>):
And did. I haven't played chess since high school.
--
Jerry "antisocial" Bauer
Ulo Melton
Touch one pawn and you'll be back on the board before you know it.
--
Ulo Melton
http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure
"Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator
in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
Jerry Bauer
(in article <4shvu3181aj9ene4r...@4ax.com>):
While I wasn't actually *forced* to go there, summer camp seemed
exilish to me. Actually, a majority of the campers, it appeared,
felt the same way; Camp Granada was quite exilicious. There was a
great deal of exilosity, the place exuded exileness. Many of us felt
that our parents were exilers.
--
Jerry Randal Bauer
Robert Bannister
> that? I have never liked spelling out letters of the alphabet, like
> "ell" as a general practice (I'm willing to accept British practice that
> "L" is how it is spelled) but I've had to accept the longer versions
> since I am usually outvoted by fellow players.
Um, "ell" is a word, a measure, not a spelling of the letter L.
--
Rob Bannister
bill van
Peter Boulding <p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 08:21:32 GMT, bill van <bil...@shawcanada.ca> wrote in
> <billvan-3FDB33...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>:
>
> >> No. Exiles is a group of people. Exilings are a group of actions.
> >> Completely different definitions.
> >
> >Then "exilings" would require a completely different entry in the
> >dictionary. But it does not have one. Exiles can mean not only the
> >people, but also the act of forcing them into exile, and the period of
> >their absence. So there is no need for a noun "exilings."
>
> Not so. A gerund (what the Oxford calls a 'verbal noun') is a verb form;
> it's valid whether or not a dictionary lists it. The fact that the NSOED
> lists the verb "pull" but fails to list "pulling" as a noun has no effect on
> the validity of the sentence "Pulling is an essential part of both tug o'
> war and male adolescence."
Exiling obviously exists as part of the regular verb form. Exiling
dissidents is a common practice. That's not what I'm arguing against.
The form Greg is arguing for would have to be able to be pluralized,
like "landings" and "endings." So in the case of your argument,
"pullings" would have to be a word. Also "swimmings," "singings,"
"startings," and "arguings." Can you agree that those are not
automatically real words, even though they are derived from a regular
verb form?
I think you're implying that any verb form that can theoretically be
formed should be accorded word status. But Shirley that's not the way
our language works.
>
> In the case of "exile" you're on particularly weak ground, since all
> appropriate usages listed in the Oxford - i.e. those referring the action
> rather than to the object of that action - seem to refer to the action as
> seen from the viewpoint of the object, whereas the 'verbal noun' "exiling"
> refers to the transitive action.
I have no problem with "exiling." It's "exilings" that bothers me.
Good: "Exiling Trotsky was a good call.
Not good: The exilings to Siberia greatly diminished the Menshevik men's
chorus."
Note there are only about 600 hits for "exilings" on the entire Web, out
of, probably, a few trillion words, and that a good many of those appear
to be specialized jargon from a role-playing game. I think that's way
less than critical mass.
--
bill
remove my country for e-mail
bill van
"ZBicyclist" <ZBicy...@excite.com> wrote:
> Opus the Penguin wrote:
> > ZBicyclist (ZBicy...@excite.com) wrote:
> >
> >> When we used to play, we'd just use a standard Merriam-Webster
> >> Collegiate dictionary. The main reason was that we already owned
> >> one. The second reason was to see how close the person putting
> >> down the letters could get to the actual definition. I don't
> >> remember arguments about standard pluralization or verb tense
> >> creation. We wouldn't have even bothered to look "exilings" up.
> >
> > Because it's obviously valid, right?
>
> We'd think so, but then scrabble was a pastime, not a blood sport.
That all depends on the context in which you're playing, doesn't it? I
was never an international tournament player, but I have played against
people who were, and at that level "blood sport" fits, figuratively.
> This
> example seems right:
>
> Boris was exiled to Irkutsk in 1935. Natasha was exiled to Tashkent in 1936.
> These exilings had the effect of ...
See my reply to Peter in this thread. My argument is that you have to be
able to demonstrate some usage before it's a real word, and that
"exilings" has so little as to be insignificant.
Robert Lieblich
[ ... ]
> Scrabble is an occasional recreation to me but I know it is more
> than that to some. Are there financial incentives? I guess, if
> there is to be a World Championship of Scrabble, some World
> Agreement on a dictionary would be necessary. The dictionary
> that I use most often use, Chambers, lists both US and British
> spellings; does the "Official Dictionary" do that? I have never
> liked spelling out letters of the alphabet, like "ell" as a
> general practice (I'm willing to accept British practice that
> "L" is how it is spelled) but I've had to accept the longer
> versions since I am usually outvoted by fellow players.
>
> I don't have the rules handy but we never imposed a numerical
> penalty for an unsuccessful spelling challenge. Are penalties
> like that the rule in competition?
Graeme Thomas, a beloved (and I use that word quite seriously in his
case) participant in AUE until his death in a motorcycle accident a
year or so ago, was among the very best Scrabble players in the UK, a
regular competitor in their champtionship tournaments, and a
participant in tending to the official US Scrabbleword-list (as he
preferred to call it). You can learn a good deal about Scrabble (and
Graeme) by searching Google Groups for his name, Scrabble, and this
newsgroup, searching for relevance, not date.
I'm far from the only AUE regular who sorely misses Graeme, and his
Scrabble expertise is one of the lesser, though quite real, reasons.
--
Bob Lieblich, AmEclectic
Scrabble patzer
James Silverton
MB> James Silverton:
??>> I have never liked spelling out letters of the alphabet,
??>> like "ell" as a general practice ...
MB> Neither do I, but "ell" is legitimate anyway. It's also an
MB> obsolete unit of length equal to 45 inches. Another
MB> meaning is a wing of a building, but that's derived from
MB> the letter-name use, and I don't think I've ever seen it
MB> actually used myself. --
MB> Mark Brader, Toronto | This is Programming as a True Art
MB> Form, where style m...@vex.net | is more important
MB> than correctness... --Pontus Hedman
Given, the multiple meanings, "ell" is not perhaps the best
example but "zee" is an acceptable word in Scrabble, or so I am
told. I am not arguing that it should be but would "zee" or
"zed" be acceptable when playing Scrabble in Britain?
Les Albert
<r_s_li...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Graeme Thomas, a beloved (and I use that word quite seriously in his
>case) participant in AUE until his death in a motorcycle accident a
>year or so ago, was among the very best Scrabble players in the UK, a
>regular competitor in their champtionship tournaments, and a
>participant in tending to the official US Scrabbleword-list (as he
>preferred to call it). You can learn a good deal about Scrabble (and
>Graeme) by searching Google Groups for his name, Scrabble, and this
>newsgroup, searching for relevance, not date.
>I'm far from the only AUE regular who sorely misses Graeme, and his
>Scrabble expertise is one of the lesser, though quite real, reasons.
You might enjoy reading, "Word Freak", by Stefan Fatsis, Penguin
Books, 2001. It is sub-titled, "Heartbreak, Triumph, Genius, and
Obsession in the World of Competitive Scrabble Players". Fatsis began
exploring the world of professional Scrabble players for an article
that he was planning, and became enmeshed in their unusual world.
Les
Greg Goss
>> > Greg wrote (atribution restored)
>> >> No. Exiles is a group of people. Exilings are a group of actions.
>> >> Completely different definitions.
>Exiling obviously exists as part of the regular verb form. Exiling
>dissidents is a common practice. That's not what I'm arguing against.
>The form Greg is arguing for would have to be able to be pluralized,
>like "landings" and "endings."
[cuts]
>I have no problem with "exiling." It's "exilings" that bothers me.
>
>Good: "Exiling Trotsky was a good call.
>Not good: The exilings to Siberia greatly diminished the Menshevik men's
>chorus."
You have a good example of what Greg intended, though a bit more
awkward than Mike's equivalent one.
>Note there are only about 600 hits for "exilings" on the entire Web, out
>of, probably, a few trillion words, and that a good many of those appear
>to be specialized jargon from a role-playing game. I think that's way
>less than critical mass.
OK, but if you don't accept this word, then how do you describe the
cause of the decline of the Menshevik singers? The word is clear in
context and useful in a somewhat limited frame. I'm startled at how
rare it is on the web. I guess it's a reflection of my comparative
interests in lava and politics that it seems to be a more normal
English word than aa.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
bill van
"James Silverton" <not.jim....@verizon.not> wrote:
> Mark wrote on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:12:30 -0000:
>
> MB> James Silverton:
> ??>> I have never liked spelling out letters of the alphabet,
> ??>> like "ell" as a general practice ...
>
> MB> Neither do I, but "ell" is legitimate anyway. It's also an
> MB> obsolete unit of length equal to 45 inches. Another
> MB> meaning is a wing of a building, but that's derived from
> MB> the letter-name use, and I don't think I've ever seen it
> MB> actually used myself. --
> MB> Mark Brader, Toronto | This is Programming as a True Art
> MB> Form, where style m...@vex.net | is more important
> MB> than correctness... --Pontus Hedman
>
> Given, the multiple meanings, "ell" is not perhaps the best
> example but "zee" is an acceptable word in Scrabble, or so I am
> told. I am not arguing that it should be but would "zee" or
> "zed" be acceptable when playing Scrabble in Britain?
>
It depends on the authority you adopt, but the Scrabble-sanctioned
dictionary and my small Canadian Oxford allow both.
Greg Goss
>James Silverton wrote:
>>
>> I totally refuse to take Frisbees seriously.
>
>Dissing discs, I see. That's not a well-rounded point of view.
My roommate in 1981 was the co-founder of the Canadian Frisbee
Championships. He was the artist for the picture of his friend who's
image graced the millions (thousands?) of Orange Crush Frisbees
produced to promote and be promoted by the national championships.
In exchange for his success at promoting the toy, the maker of
Frisbees (Whammo? Irwin? someone else?) offered him plane fare to the
games each year, and occasionally brought him to whammo labs to play
with experimental frisbees. The box in his closet was fascinating.
1981 was before the appearance of tiny (5 inch?) frisbees or
weighted-edge fabric disks, but he had them there with the official
Frisbee name on them. He had one sixteen inch disk in the box that
seemed to weigh four pounds or so. You couldn't imagine it generating
enough lift to keep that weight off the ground, but it flew. He said
that they dumped the design because it was hard to get any curve on
it. A straight flight is nice for an airliner but dead-boring for a
toy. Besides, the weight could do serious damage to windows and maybe
cars.
The existence of a huge box of experimental frisbees seems to indicate
that SOMEONE was taking them seriously.
bill van
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
Exiling them to Siberia greatly diminished the Menshevik men's chorus.
Jerry Bauer
(in article
<billvan-D929C1...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>):
However beneficial the exilings may have been, they had the
unfortunate effect of making Siberia exileful.
--
Jerry Randal Bauer
Ulo Melton
>While I wasn't actually *forced* to go there, summer camp seemed
>exilish to me. Actually, a majority of the campers, it appeared,
>felt the same way; Camp Granada was quite exilicious. There was a
>great deal of exilosity, the place exuded exileness. Many of us felt
>that our parents were exilers.
What a tragedy, to have to endure such exileage at such a tender age.
bill van
Ulo Melton <melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
> Jerry Bauer wrote:
>
> >While I wasn't actually *forced* to go there, summer camp seemed
> >exilish to me. Actually, a majority of the campers, it appeared,
> >felt the same way; Camp Granada was quite exilicious. There was a
> >great deal of exilosity, the place exuded exileness. Many of us felt
> >that our parents were exilers.
>
> What a tragedy, to have to endure such exileage at such a tender age.
But when the sun came out, imagine the exileration.
bill van
Jerry Bauer <use...@bauerstar.com> wrote:
Where they engaged in vigorous debate about what banish meant.
Jerry Bauer
(in article
<billvan-7FB2EF...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>):
I wasn't really a ban, it was just sort of banish.
bill van
Jerry Bauer <use...@bauerstar.com> wrote:
you've gone past the banishing point.
Peter Boulding
<billvan-2003C4...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>:
>Exiling obviously exists as part of the regular verb form.
The existence of a participle per se is Irrelevant. The question is whether
it can be used as a gerund (what the Oxford calls a 'verbal noun'). Then the
only further question is whether the noun can realistically be pluralized.
>Exiling
>dissidents is a common practice. That's not what I'm arguing against.
>The form Greg is arguing for would have to be able to be pluralized,
>like "landings" and "endings." So in the case of your argument,
>"pullings" would have to be a word. Also "swimmings," "singings,"
>"startings," and "arguings." Can you agree that those are not
>automatically real words, even though they are derived from a regular
>verb form?
I haven't thought this through clearly enough: while "startings", like
"endings", is probably valid I'm certainly not happy with "swimmings,"
"singings," or "arguings." Perhaps one needs to ask oneself whether the noun
form can take an article. Can one refer to *the* swimming or to *an*
arguing?
>I think you're implying that any verb form that can theoretically be
>formed should be accorded word status. But Shirley that's not the way
>our language works.
>>
>> In the case of "exile" you're on particularly weak ground, since all
>> appropriate usages listed in the Oxford - i.e. those referring the action
>> rather than to the object of that action - seem to refer to the action as
>> seen from the viewpoint of the object, whereas the 'verbal noun' "exiling"
>> refers to the transitive action.
>
>I have no problem with "exiling." It's "exilings" that bothers me.
>
>Good: "Exiling Trotsky was a good call.
>Not good: The exilings to Siberia greatly diminished the Menshevik men's
>chorus."
Clumsy maybe, but IMO valid.
>Note there are only about 600 hits for "exilings" on the entire Web, out
>of, probably, a few trillion words, and that a good many of those appear
>to be specialized jargon from a role-playing game. I think that's way
>less than critical mass.
There we differ. The paucity of circumstances under which a word is needed
doesn't affect its validity unless the number of occasions on which it is
required is necessarily zero, either because the concept implied is
illogical or because or because there's a universally accepted alternative
in common use. This doesn't apply to "exilings"; the suggested subtitute -
"exiles" - (when not denoting the victims of the action) refers to the
action as suffered by the victim(s) whereas "exilings" denotes the action as
performed by the perpetrators.
--
Regards, Peter Boulding
p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal music & images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music
bill van
Peter Boulding <p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 01:46:17 GMT, bill van <bil...@shawcanada.ca> wrote in
> <billvan-2003C4...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>:
>
> >Exiling obviously exists as part of the regular verb form.
>
> The existence of a participle per se is Irrelevant. The question is whether
> it can be used as a gerund (what the Oxford calls a 'verbal noun'). Then the
> only further question is whether the noun can realistically be pluralized.
>
> >Exiling
> >dissidents is a common practice. That's not what I'm arguing against.
> >The form Greg is arguing for would have to be able to be pluralized,
> >like "landings" and "endings." So in the case of your argument,
> >"pullings" would have to be a word. Also "swimmings," "singings,"
> >"startings," and "arguings." Can you agree that those are not
> >automatically real words, even though they are derived from a regular
> >verb form?
>
> I haven't thought this through clearly enough: while "startings", like
> "endings", is probably valid I'm certainly not happy with "swimmings,"
> "singings," or "arguings." Perhaps one needs to ask oneself whether the noun
> form can take an article. Can one refer to *the* swimming or to *an*
> arguing?
As in "the exiling?" That's almost persuasive. But the first Oxford
definition for "exile" is the noun "expulsion". So we already have a
noun with the meaning we are looking for. Pluralizing it is revelatory:
Googling:
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,370,000 for expulsions
versus:
Results 1 - 10 of about 613 for exilings
> >I think you're implying that any verb form that can theoretically be
> >formed should be accorded word status. But Shirley that's not the way
> >our language works.
> >>
> >> In the case of "exile" you're on particularly weak ground, since all
> >> appropriate usages listed in the Oxford - i.e. those referring the action
> >> rather than to the object of that action - seem to refer to the action as
> >> seen from the viewpoint of the object, whereas the 'verbal noun' "exiling"
> >> refers to the transitive action.
> >
> >I have no problem with "exiling." It's "exilings" that bothers me.
> >
> >Good: "Exiling Trotsky was a good call.
> >Not good: The exilings to Siberia greatly diminished the Menshevik men's
> >chorus."
>
> Clumsy maybe, but IMO valid.
I'll agree this far: it's clumsy.
>
> >Note there are only about 600 hits for "exilings" on the entire Web, out
> >of, probably, a few trillion words, and that a good many of those appear
> >to be specialized jargon from a role-playing game. I think that's way
> >less than critical mass.
>
> There we differ. The paucity of circumstances under which a word is needed
> doesn't affect its validity unless the number of occasions on which it is
> required is necessarily zero, either because the concept implied is
> illogical or because or because there's a universally accepted alternative
> in common use.
I'll go with the universally accepted alternative in common use.
Exiles isn't completely satisfactory, but expulsions works.
> This doesn't apply to "exilings"; the suggested subtitute -
> "exiles" - (when not denoting the victims of the action) refers to the
> action as suffered by the victim(s) whereas "exilings" denotes the action as
> performed by the perpetrators.
I see what you mean, and I might give it up if I were still trying to
defend "exiles" as the one word to use rather than "exilings."
Expulsions, though, has substantially the same meaning and is 2,235 more
common than "exilings." That's a strong argument for the "universally
accepted alternative."
Incidentally, the Scrabble dictionary lists "exiling" as a present
participle, but it does not take a plural form.
Boron Elgar
wrote:
My friend who took the funny sign pictures and is very active in
Scrabble, is mentioned several times in Fatsis' book.
Here is a picture my friend took of Fatsis.
http://annsan.smugmug.com/gallery/3051822_vJtno/1/166992676_xGij8/Medium
Boron
Nick Spalding
on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:23:45 -0500:
> Mark Brader wrote:
> >
> > Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading. Many of his
> > columns are available at http://www.straightdope.com as well as
> > having been collected in book form.
>
> The whole "world's smartest human" is a put-on, possibly aimed as Ms. vos
> Savant's overblown claim. Cecil is a pen name. The newsgroup
> alt.fan.cecil-adams just exists, and generally has little to do with Cecil
> at all.
It hasn't had in all the years I've been reading it which go back to
September 1995.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
James Silverton
??>> Mark Brader wrote:
??>>>
??>>> Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading.
??>>> Many of his columns are available at
http://www.straightdope.com as well as having
??>>> been collected in book form.
??>>
??>> The whole "world's smartest human" is a put-on, possibly
??>> aimed as Ms. vos Savant's overblown claim. Cecil is a pen
??>> name. The newsgroup alt.fan.cecil-adams just exists, and
??>> generally has little to do with Cecil at all.
NS> It hasn't had in all the years I've been reading it which
NS> go back to September 1995.
A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
it seems to me, a general discussion group?
Peter Boulding
<not.jim....@verizon.not> wrote in <GO4Ij.5997$bC6.4096@trnddc08>:
>Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
>it seems to me, a general discussion group?
YRDLSH (You Really Do Learn Stuff Here). Possibly.
Richard R. Hershberger
wrote:> >>Now, here's my beef with the dictionary. I'm sitting here at
> >>Scrabulous with the letters "EXILING" in my tray. There's a
> >>perfectly good "S" to hang them on. "EXILINGS". It works for me
> >>but not for the Scrabble dictionary. "BEATINGS" is ok, but not
> >>"EXILINGS". Why not?
>
> >>It's perfectly easy to come up with a sentence that uses
> >>"exilings". Online, for example, I find this sentence in a page on
> >>Medieval history: "[These conflicts] turned into true class wars
> >>punctuated by massacres, exilings, and destruction." Now,
> >>stylistically, I'd make all three of those nouns singular. But is
> >>it really *wrong* to say "exilings"? Is "exilings" not really even
> >>a word?
>
> > Probably not. You're looking for a plural noun that signifies the
> > act of banishment from one's native land, and "exiles" already
> > serves that purpose. Substitute if for "exilings" in the sentence
> > you quoted, and you have the same meaning and have to make your
> > beak form only two syllables instead of three.
>
> That's interesting as a style note, but irrelevant to the question of
> whether "exilings" is a word.
Wha??? Are we letting pass the claim that the noun "exile" can mean
the act of banishment? MWOnline recognizes two basic meanings: the
state of being exiled, and the person who is exiled. It in counter-
intuitive to me that it can also mean the act of exiling a person.
The bottom line seems to me that "exile" is a standard verb, with the
standard form "exiling" which, like other standard verbs, can be used
as a gerund, i.e. a noun, and therefore like other nouns can be
pluralized. Whether or not this gerund is used often enough to rate
its own dictionary entry is beside the point as far as English usage
is concerned, though of vital interest so far as the Scrabble
dictionary is concerned.
Richard R. Hershberger
Nick Spalding
on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:29:26 GMT:
> Nick wrote on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:07:38 +0100:
>
> ??>> Mark Brader wrote:
> ??>>>
> ??>>> Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading.
> ??>>> Many of his columns are available at
> http://www.straightdope.com as well as having
> ??>>> been collected in book form.
> ??>>
> ??>> The whole "world's smartest human" is a put-on, possibly
> ??>> aimed as Ms. vos Savant's overblown claim. Cecil is a pen
> ??>> name. The newsgroup alt.fan.cecil-adams just exists, and
> ??>> generally has little to do with Cecil at all.
>
> NS> It hasn't had in all the years I've been reading it which
> NS> go back to September 1995.
>
> A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
> attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
> it seems to me, a general discussion group?
Completely general, it prides itself that nothing is OT. There is a
considerable body of RRs a good few of whom have met in person, sometimes
in an organised way – what is called a boink here. Several of the RRs are
also to be met here. It is a high traffic group, something close to half
as busy again as aue.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Richard R. Hershberger
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 01:46:17 GMT, bill van <bill...@shawcanada.ca> wrote in
> <billvan-2003C4.18461530032...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>:
>
> >Exiling obviously exists as part of the regular verb form.
>
> The existence of a participle per se is Irrelevant. The question is whether
> it can be used as a gerund (what the Oxford calls a 'verbal noun'). Then the
> only further question is whether the noun can realistically be pluralized.
>
> >Exiling
> >dissidents is a common practice. That's not what I'm arguing against.
> >The form Greg is arguing for would have to be able to be pluralized,
> >like "landings" and "endings." So in the case of your argument,
> >"pullings" would have to be a word. Also "swimmings," "singings,"
> >"startings," and "arguings." Can you agree that those are not
> >automatically real words, even though they are derived from a regular
> >verb form?
>
> I haven't thought this through clearly enough: while "startings", like
> "endings", is probably valid I'm certainly not happy with "swimmings,"
> "singings," or "arguings." Perhaps one needs to ask oneself whether the noun
> form can take an article. Can one refer to *the* swimming or to *an*
> arguing?
As a point of information, "a singing" is routinely used in the Sacred
Harp community, as in "Will you be at the singing this Saturday?" One
also sees "a sing" used the same way, but that is irrelevent to the
legitimacy of "a singing". "Singing" is pluralized in the standard
way, as a check on Google will show.
"Startings" is found used in various ways. Sometimes it is synonymous
with "beginnings" but sometimes it is a gerund from the intranstive
sense of "to start" of "to react with a sudden brief involuntary
movement". You can find this in the medical literature.
"Arguings": Does it matter that this was used by Daniel Defoe in
Robinson Crusoe? "...civilizing, and reducing them by kind usage and
affectionate arguings..." There are similar examples of "arguing"
used as a synonym for "argument" well into the 19th century.
"Pullings" is used in gardening, as in "cuttings and pullings".
"Swimmings" is an interesting case. I don't know of any idiomatic use
of this form, but I suspect that the Scrabble dictionary accepts it,
since MWOnline has an entry for "swimming" as a noun: "the act, art,
or sport of one that swims and dives" and the Scrabble dictionary
routinely accepts pluralized forms of any noun with its own entry.
This is odd because the gerund "swimming" is normally used as a mass
noun, and mass nouns don't take plural forms. On the other hand,
nouns normally used as mass nouns can routinely be used as count
nouns, in a sense of "a specific instance of type of [the mass
noun]". For example, "charity" is a mass noun, characterizing a
personality trait, but by extension we can say things like "I gave to
three charities last year." There is no idiomatic count noun use of
"swimming", but as the examples of "singings" and "pullings" show, the
form is available for the taking.
This is really an issue of morphology: what forms are we willing to
assume are valid, even without individual entries. In the case of
plural nouns, dictionaries typically only list a form if it is non-
standard, so the Scrabble dictionary (as I understand it) by default
allows you to tack an /s/ on the end of any word explicitly listed as
a noun. The mass/count noun distinction is ignored. The current
whackiness lies in that there is also an English rule that any present
participle can be used as a noun. Dictionary entries don't enter into
this, except that if such verbal nouns (gerunds) reach a threshhold of
frequency, they get their own entries.
My frustration with this from a Scrabble perspective is that there is
no way to predict which gerunds will have their own entries and which
won't. It is one thing to memorize a list of two-letter words. It is
quite another to memorize which gerunds are and are not on the list.
So in practice this is a random factor. Were I playing Opus in a live
game and he put down "exilings" for 101 points, I would automatically
challenge it: not because of anything to do with English words, but
because the possibility of losing a turn is far outweighed by those
points, and the outcome of the challenge would essetially be a coin
toss. From either a gaming or an intellectual perspective, this seems
to me to be poor design.
Richard R. Hershberger
Mike M
wrote:
>
> Given, the multiple meanings, "ell" is not perhaps the best
> example but "zee" is an acceptable word in Scrabble, or so I am
> told. I am not arguing that it should be but would "zee" or
> "zed" be acceptable when playing Scrabble in Britain?
>
They would to me and Mrs. M, the only person with whom I ever play
Scrabble.
We are both of a mind with Opus the Penguin re. Scrabble dictionaries
and learning obscure words "just for the sake of it". If challenged,
you have to first give a definition of the word, and *then* check the
spelling in our household (Collins) dictionary.
There are rarely arguments (probably because she beats me 9 games out
of 10).
Mike M
QueBarbara
wrote:
You must have Opus' VIP just last week.
"Cecil explains the science of farts here:
<http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_079.html>
He talks about why beans are often the culprit and concludes with
this. "Other foods that may produce farts of unusual pungency
include broccoli, onions, cauliflower, cabbage, radishes, and raw
apples. Don't those seem like the ideal salad ingredients for an
eventful sorority lunch?"
I'd guess that's a representative rather than exhaustive list. But
for what it's worth, the vegetables you ask about didn't make the
cut. "
--
QueBarbara
Bob Ward
I move that, in the event we ever have a Scrabble competition among
AFCAns, that the Summary be accepted as the official dictionary for
the event.
Any way we could make that happen anywhere online?
Justin Hiltscher
How about 're' (a drop of golden sun)? 'fa'? 'la' (the note that
follows 'so')? 'ti'?
Those are all acceptable words in the current Scrabble Dictionary. Memorizing
two letter words, aside from 'gaming' the system, also helps bring the game to
a definite end when your remaining rack consists of all vowels, four of which
are 'i's. (Shudder) Then you know to look for 'a?', 'b?', 'h?', '?d', '?f',
'?n', '?t', 'l?', 'p?', 's?', 't?', 'q?', and 'x?'
--
Justin Hiltscher
James Silverton
JH> On 2008-03-31, Mike M <mikm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
??>> On 31 Mar, 03:53, "James Silverton"
??>> <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> wrote:
??>>
??>>> Given, the multiple meanings, "ell" is not perhaps the
??>>> best example but "zee" is an acceptable word in Scrabble,
??>>> or so I am told. I am not arguing that it should be but
??>>> would "zee" or "zed" be acceptable when playing Scrabble
??>>> in Britain?
??>>>
??>> They would to me and Mrs. M, the only person with whom I
??>> ever play Scrabble.
??>>
??>> We are both of a mind with Opus the Penguin re. Scrabble
??>> dictionaries and learning obscure words "just for the sake
??>> of it". If challenged, you have to first give a definition
??>> of the word, and *then* check the spelling in our
??>> household (Collins) dictionary.
??>>
??>> There are rarely arguments (probably because she beats me
??>> 9 games out of 10).
??>>
JH> How about 're' (a drop of golden sun)? 'fa'? 'la' (the
JH> note that follows 'so')? 'ti'?
JH> Those are all acceptable words in the current Scrabble
JH> Dictionary. Memorizing two letter words, aside from
JH> 'gaming' the system, also helps bring the game to a
JH> definite end when your remaining rack consists of all
JH> vowels, four of which are 'i's. (Shudder) Then you know
JH> to look for 'a?', 'b?', 'h?', '?d', '?f', '?n', '?t', 'l?',
JH> 'p?', 's?', 't?', 'q?', and 'x?'
Fascinating! What is the name of the "current Scrabble
Dictionary" and it's copyright holder? I'm just interested but I
have absolutely no intention of deviating from an agreed
dictionary, not even if an official one is approved by the
National Frisbee Association :-)
Peter Ward
>James Silverton wrote, in <GO4Ij.5997$bC6.4096@trnddc08>
> on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:29:26 GMT:
>>
>> A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
>> attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
>> it seems to me, a general discussion group?
>
>Completely general, it prides itself that nothing is OT. There is a
>considerable body of RRs a good few of whom have met in person, sometimes
RRs?
--
Peter
I'm an alien
Here am I, brain the size of a planet, and I spend my time posting to Usenet.
email: groups at asylum dot nildram dot co dot uk
Peter Ward
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:07:38 +0100, Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie>
>wrote:
>
>>ZBicyclist wrote, in <VpUHj.5712$qT6....@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>
>> on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:23:45 -0500:
>>
>>> Mark Brader wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading. Many of his
>>> > columns are available at http://www.straightdope.com as well as
>>> > having been collected in book form.
>>>
>>> The whole "world's smartest human" is a put-on, possibly aimed as Ms. vos
>>> Savant's overblown claim. Cecil is a pen name. The newsgroup
>>> alt.fan.cecil-adams just exists, and generally has little to do with Cecil
>>> at all.
>>
>>It hasn't had in all the years I've been reading it which go back to
>>September 1995.
>
>You must have Opus' VIP just last week.
Opus' Very Important Person? Does not compute.
Boron Elgar
Seek ye Merriam-Webster...
http://www.amazon.com/Official-Scrabble-Players-Dictionary/dp/0877799296
http://www.wordgear.com/productInfo.asp?id=2&pid=29
This is all official stuff for NSA tournaments. The dictionary or word
sources you use at home for fun play are really up to you and your
playmate.
I really got into Scrabble when playing with NSA competitors, so I
have always used the official lists and books with them and at game
rooms or online. I used to have the OSPD in hardcover - two copies,
as a matter of fact.
The tournament/competition rules are here:
http://scrabble-assoc.com/build/rules/rules2.html
Still, when I play with The Hub, we don't much bother with
dictionaries at all becuase we play for fun.
Boron
Les Albert
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:12:28 +0100, Nick Spalding wrote:
>>James Silverton wrote, in <GO4Ij.5997$bC6.4096@trnddc08>
>> on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:29:26 GMT:
>>> A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
>>> attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
>>> it seems to me, a general discussion group?
>>Completely general, it prides itself that nothing is OT. There is a
>>considerable body of RRs a good few of whom have met in person, sometimes
>RRs?
Railroads? It's a polite reference to people who are off the tracks?
Les
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:12:28 +0100, Nick Spalding wrote:
>
>>James Silverton wrote, in <GO4Ij.5997$bC6.4096@trnddc08>
>> on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:29:26 GMT:
>>>
>>> A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
>>> attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
>>> it seems to me, a general discussion group?
>>
>>Completely general, it prides itself that nothing is OT. There is a
>>considerable body of RRs a good few of whom have met in person, sometimes
>
>RRs?
Respected Regular.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
James Silverton
??>> Justin wrote on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:06:41 GMT:
JH>>> Those are all acceptable words in the current Scrabble
JH>>> Dictionary. Memorizing two letter words, aside from
JH>>> 'gaming' the system, also helps bring the game to a
JH>>> definite end when your remaining rack consists of all
JH>>> vowels, four of which are 'i's. (Shudder) Then you know
JH>>> to look for 'a?', 'b?', 'h?', '?d', '?f', '?n', '?t',
JH>>> 'l?', 'p?', 's?', 't?', 'q?', and 'x?'
??>>
??>> Fascinating! What is the name of the "current Scrabble
??>> Dictionary" and it's copyright holder? I'm just interested
??>> but I have absolutely no intention of deviating from an
??>> agreed dictionary, not even if an official one is approved
??>> by the National Frisbee Association :-)
??>>
??>> James Silverton
??>> Potomac, Maryland
??>>
??>> E-mail, with obvious alterations:
??>> not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
BE> Seek ye Merriam-Webster...
BE>
http://www.amazon.com/Official-Scrabble-Players-Dictionary/dp/0877799296
BE> http://www.wordgear.com/productInfo.asp?id=2&pid=29
BE> This is all official stuff for NSA tournaments. The
BE> dictionary or word sources you use at home for fun play are
BE> really up to you and your playmate.
BE> I really got into Scrabble when playing with NSA
BE> competitors, so I have always used the official lists and
BE> books with them and at game rooms or online. I used to
BE> have the OSPD in hardcover - two copies, as a matter of
BE> fact.
BE> The tournament/competition rules are here:
BE> http://scrabble-assoc.com/build/rules/rules2.html
BE> Still, when I play with The Hub, we don't much bother with
BE> dictionaries at all becuase we play for fun.
Seriously, thanks very much for the reference to the very
complete and comprehensive official rules.
Boron Elgar
A pleasure. Nice seeing over here. Another fresh face from rfc.
Boron.
QueBarbara
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:07:17 -0500, QueBarbara wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:07:38 +0100, Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>ZBicyclist wrote, in <VpUHj.5712$qT6....@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>
>>> on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:23:45 -0500:
>>>
>>>> Mark Brader wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Cecil's nothing like Marilyn and is well worth reading. Many of his
>>>> > columns are available at http://www.straightdope.com as well as
>>>> > having been collected in book form.
>>>>
>>>> The whole "world's smartest human" is a put-on, possibly aimed as Ms. vos
>>>> Savant's overblown claim. Cecil is a pen name. The newsgroup
>>>> alt.fan.cecil-adams just exists, and generally has little to do with Cecil
>>>> at all.
>>>
>>>It hasn't had in all the years I've been reading it which go back to
>>>September 1995.
>>
>>You must have Opus' VIP just last week.
>
>Opus' Very Important Person? Does not compute.
Very Important Post. It was about flatulence, after all. And Unca
Cecil.
--
QueBarbara
Peter Ward
Is that from the other group, then? (I'm in AFCA).
Peter Ward
Ah, right. I think.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:14:00 +0100, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:47:11 +0100, Peter Ward <m...@privacy.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:12:28 +0100, Nick Spalding wrote:
>>>
>>>>James Silverton wrote, in <GO4Ij.5997$bC6.4096@trnddc08>
>>>> on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:29:26 GMT:
>>>>>
>>>>> A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
>>>>> attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
>>>>> it seems to me, a general discussion group?
>>>>
>>>>Completely general, it prides itself that nothing is OT. There is a
>>>>considerable body of RRs a good few of whom have met in person, sometimes
>>>
>>>RRs?
>>
>>Respected Regular.
>
>Is that from the other group, then? (I'm in AFCA).
Yes - in AUE.
Bob Ward
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:12:28 +0100, Nick Spalding wrote:
>
>>James Silverton wrote, in <GO4Ij.5997$bC6.4096@trnddc08>
>> on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:29:26 GMT:
>>>
>>> A very interesting tale that has obviously just come to my
>>> attention :-) Is there a theme to a.f.cecil-adams or is it, as
>>> it seems to me, a general discussion group?
>>
>>Completely general, it prides itself that nothing is OT. There is a
>>considerable body of RRs a good few of whom have met in person, sometimes
>
>RRs?
Regular Readers?
Regular Responders?
Regular Riters?
D.F. Manno
"James Silverton" <not.jim....@verizon.not> wrote:
> I have never
> liked spelling out letters of the alphabet, like "ell" as a
> general practice (I'm willing to accept British practice that
> "L" is how it is spelled) but I've had to accept the longer
> versions since I am usually outvoted by fellow players.
How do you feel about "em" and "en"?
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
"They bury your dreams and dig up the worthless/Goodnight/God bless/And
kiss goodbye to the earth/The other side of summer"
D.F. Manno
"James Silverton" <not.jim....@verizon.not> wrote:
> Fascinating! What is the name of the "current Scrabble
> Dictionary" and it's copyright holder?
I just happen to have one handy. The title is "The Official Scrabble®
Players Dictionary Fourth Edition," copyright ©2005 by Hasbro, Inc., the
makers of the game.