Single Word Oxymoron?
Alex Kirlik
As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
"military intelligence."
What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
--
Alex
INTERNET: kir...@chmsr.gatech.edu
Jared Levine
Doesn't qualify as far as I'm concerned, but I'll post it nonetheless:
INFINITESSIMAL
In so far as that one word means completely antonymous things, it might
be interpreted by some as a one-word oxymoron, no? A thought. If not
this, then what?
BoxMaster
Alex Kirlik (kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu) wrote:
: As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
: "military intelligence."
: --
: Alex
: INTERNET: kir...@chmsr.gatech.edu
--
*******************************************************************
Jared Levine "Touch nothing! Fingerprints."
jle...@haven.ios.com -- Monsieur Milo Perrier
homepage: http://haven.ios.com/~jlevine/ _Murder By Death_
*******************************************************************
You don't like my .sig? Tough luck. You have a GOOD suggestion, e-mail me.
No Star Wars quotes from anyone except Mike. He'll send enough -- I'm sure.
Susan Hoover
jle...@haven.ios.com (Jared Levine) wrote:
>Doesn't qualify as far as I'm concerned, but I'll post it nonetheless:
>
>INFINITESSIMAL
>
>In so far as that one word means completely antonymous things, it might
>be interpreted by some as a one-word oxymoron, no? A thought. If not
>this, then what?
CLEAVE, perhaps, which means TO ADHERE FIRMLY as well as TO SEPARATE
INTO DISTINCT PARTS
However, my dictionaries define OXYMORON as follows:
Webster's New Collegiate 8th ed: a combination of contradictory
or incongruous words
Webster's New Universal Unabridged 2nd ed: a figure of speech in
which opposite or contradictory ideas or terms are combined
American Heritage 2nd College ed: a rhetorical figure in which
incongruous or contradictory terms are combined
OED Compact ed: a rhetorical figure by which contradictory or
incongruous terms are conjoined so as to give point to the
statement or expression; an expression, in its superficial
or literal meaning self-contradictory or absurd, but involving
a point
I could go on (more dictionaries in house ;-P), but it sounds
to me as though an oxymoron, by definition, must be multi-part.
--
Susan
Steven Chai
Hmmm, how about:
CLEAVE
It means to clasp and to let go at the same time.
Justin Pinnow
Alex Kirlik wrote:
>
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
Nonfat
Nondairy
--
______________________________________________________________________
Justin Pinnow jpi...@umich.edu
Matthew Daly
In article <52sarq$g...@mordred.gatech.edu> kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu (Alex Kirlik) writes:
>As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
>"military intelligence."
>
>What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
Hmmmm ... I think that you really do need more than one word to
make an oxymoron. However, I'll guess that you're looking for a
non-self-referent word and propose:
MONOSYLLABIC
-Matthew
--
Matthew Daly I don't buy everything I read ... I haven't
da...@ppd.kodak.com even read everything I've bought.
My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer, of course.
Michael Scott Warner
In article <52tpq8$5...@kodak.rdcs.Kodak.COM>,
Matthew Daly <da...@PPD.Kodak.COM> wrote:
>
>Hmmmm ... I think that you really do need more than one word to
>make an oxymoron. However, I'll guess that you're looking for a
>non-self-referent word and propose:
>
>MONOSYLLABIC
How about "hyphenated"? "uncapitalized"? "non-self-referent" :-)
Mike
--
Michael S. Warner, gt4...@cad.gatech.edu
Graduate Research Assistant, School of Aerospace Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332
Matthew Daly
gt4...@gypsy.cad.gatech.edu (Michael Scott Warner) writes:
>Matthew Daly <da...@PPD.Kodak.COM> wrote:
>>
>>[...] However, I'll guess that you're looking for a
>>non-self-referent word and propose:
>>
>>MONOSYLLABIC
>
>How about "hyphenated"? "uncapitalized"? "non-self-referent" :-)
non-self-referent is ugly, man. I'm not going there.... :-)
And I think you mean "capitalized".
ObMore: misspelled, unrhymeable, nonsesquipedalian
Alex Kirlik
I posed this one. My own solution follows below.
Susan Hoover (71061...@compuserve.com) wrote:
: However, my dictionaries define OXYMORON as follows:
: Webster's New Collegiate 8th ed: a combination of contradictory
: or incongruous words
: Webster's New Universal Unabridged 2nd ed: a figure of speech in
: which opposite or contradictory ideas or terms are combined
: American Heritage 2nd College ed: a rhetorical figure in which
: incongruous or contradictory terms are combined
: OED Compact ed: a rhetorical figure by which contradictory or
: incongruous terms are conjoined so as to give point to the
: statement or expression; an expression, in its superficial
: or literal meaning self-contradictory or absurd, but involving
: a point
Naturally I had in mind something akin to the 2nd OED def'n above:
i.e. "an expression, in its superficial or literal meaning self-
contradictory or absurd, but involving a point ..."
In this sense, my own solution is:
NONDESCRIPT
--
Alex Kirlik
Center for Human-Machine Systems Research
School of Industrial & Systems Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA, 30332-0205
Office Phone: 404-894-4055 Fax: 404-894-2301
INTERNET: kir...@chmsr.gatech.edu
Scott Manson
> Alex Kirlik (kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu) wrote:
> : As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> : "military intelligence."
>
> : What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
Don't know if this would qualify but I've seen this widely used
Irregardless
_______________________________
Karen L Lingel
In article <52sarq$g...@mordred.gatech.edu>, kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu (Alex Kirlik) writes:
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
Blueberries aren't really blue. (This would work better if they
weren't really berries, either.)
-k-
--------------------------------------
Karen Lingel, Physicist and Penguinist
Doug McKean
Alex Kirlik wrote:
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
Laughingstock
*******************************************************
Doug McKean
doug_...@paragon-networks.com
-------------------------------------------------------
The comments and opinions stated herein are mine alone,
and do not reflect those of my employer.
-------------------------------------------------------
*******************************************************
Gregory Snow
In article <52sarq$g...@mordred.gatech.edu>, kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu (Alex Ki
rlik) writes:
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
SOPHOMORE if you look at the roots, it literally means wise fool (a
good definition of some sophomores).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory L. Snow | The mind is a terrible thing to waste,
(Greg) | Use it sparingly.
sn...@biostat.washington.edu |
Noam Elkies
I suspect the intended answer was "sophomore", though "bridegroom"
and "fortepiano" also come to mind.
--Noam D. Elkies (elk...@math.harvard.edu)
Dept. of Mathematics, Harvard University
Brian Tung
Alex Kirlik wrote:
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
to which Justin Pinnow inexplicably answered:
> Nonfat
>
> Nondairy
A simple "non-" does not a contradiction make. "Non-fat" (AP style
dictates that "non-" almost always takes a hyphen, except in selected
words; one example is "nonchalant") nowhere implies, also, "fat."
Ditto "non-dairy."
Actually, I find this question amusing, sort of. An "obvious" answer
is "oxymoron," literally "sharp-dull" (or something like that). Another
similar example is "pianoforte," literally "soft-loud." Of course, this
instrument (or rather, its descendant) is more commonly called simply a
"piano."
I rather suspect that what the original poster had in mind are words
with two definitions which are opposites. A typically posed example is
"cleave." This interpretation of the puzzle is in the archives, under
the name english/synonyms/contranym.p (I have an old copy of the index,
so this name may be out of date).
byron elbows
br...@isi.edu
http://gost.isi.edu/brian/
* Guaranteed 100 Percent Award Free!
byron elbows' two rules of human nature:
* No one is as weird as they think they are.
* Everyone is weirder than others think they are.
John A. Gregor, Jr.
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
Indescribable perhaps?
-John
Gaku Sato
Sheesh, folks.
We could type out non-self-referent words until out fingers were worn
down to bloody nubs.
A single word oxymoron is . . .
[SPOILER]
Superette
Gaku Sato
gaku...@stanford.edu
Dennis A. Sevakis
Alex Kirlik wrote:
>
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
>
> Alex
> INTERNET: kir...@chmsr.gatech.edu
bad
cool
hot
god
Several four-letter words
My all-time personal favourite:
life
Ed Murphy
jle...@haven.ios.com (Jared Levine) wrote:
> Doesn't qualify as far as I'm concerned, but I'll post it nonetheless:
> INFINITESSIMAL
> In so far as that one word means completely antonymous things, it might
> be interpreted by some as a one-word oxymoron, no? A thought. If not
> this, then what?
What antonymous things does it mean? The only meaning(s) of that word I'm
familiar with is "infinitely small; a nonzero number infinitely close to
zero; the reciprocal of a transfinite number".
> BoxMaster
--
Ed Murphy <zvy...@ix.netcom.com> A person who is "of sound mind"
http://www.bayside.net/users/ford/ is one who keeps the inner madman
#include <std/disclaimer.h> under lock and key. -Paul Valery
Ed Murphy
br...@dot.isi.edu (Brian Tung) wrote:
> Actually, I find this question amusing, sort of. An "obvious" answer
> is "oxymoron," literally "sharp-dull" (or something like that). Another
> similar example is "pianoforte," literally "soft-loud." Of course, this
> instrument (or rather, its descendant) is more commonly called simply a
> "piano."
I'll add that Doug Hofstadter, in the final chapter of _GEB_, imagines a
new series of computers called smart-stupids.
[crossposted to alt.fan.hofstadter]
Carl Witthoft
In article <VA.000000cb.1dd7fabb@sm01316> SDMa...@navix.net writes:
>> : What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>Don't know if this would qualify but I've seen this widely used
>
>Irregardless
Help stamp out illiteracy: stop using irregardless, normalcy, flammable,
downsize, "negative impact," and probably a hundred other abominations.
--
Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates
ca...@aoainc.com 54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201
Musicians Just "Do" It.
an...@magicnet.net
>
>As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
>"military intelligence."
>
How about the proper name "Noyes"?
>
>
>--
>Alex
>INTERNET: kir...@chmsr.gatech.edu
Jules E. Lafrance
Alex Kirlik (kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu) writes:
> I posed this one. My own solution follows below.
>
> : OED Compact ed: a rhetorical figure by which contradictory or
> : incongruous terms are conjoined so as to give point to the
> : statement or expression; an expression, in its superficial
> : or literal meaning self-contradictory or absurd, but involving
> : a point
>
>
> Naturally I had in mind something akin to the 2nd OED def'n above:
>
> i.e. "an expression, in its superficial or literal meaning self-
> contradictory or absurd, but involving a point ..."
>
>
> In this sense, my own solution is:
>
>
> NONDESCRIPT
If you mean that one word would *include* a word and it opposite,
I would choose:
PIANOFORTE
If you mean that one *whole* word should have one meaning and its
opposite, I would opt for:
INFLAMMABLE
My understanding is that the word "flammable" was coined to
connote something which will burn easily, because too many people thought
the word "inflammable" meant just the opposite. But the original meaning
of "inflammable" is that something will burn easily, and the modern
meaning is that it will NOT.
--
* Let's build bridges; walls grow pretty
Jules Lafrance well on their own.
lafr...@freenet.carleton.ca * Construisons des ponts; les murs
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~ab388/ croissent très bien par eux-mêmes.
David Grabiner
In article <52tpq8$5...@kodak.rdcs.Kodak.COM>, Matthew Daly writes:
> In article <52sarq$g...@mordred.gatech.edu> kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu (Alex Kirlik) writes:
>> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
>> "military intelligence."
>>
>> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
> Hmmmm ... I think that you really do need more than one word to
> make an oxymoron. However, I'll guess that you're looking for a
> non-self-referent word and propose:
> MONOSYLLABIC
How about "non-self-referent", which you have defined here?
Unfortunately, it's hyphenated; in the traditional version of this
paradox, the adjectives are "autological" and "heterological", and
"heterological" can be neither.
--
David Grabiner, grab...@msri.org, http://baseball.berkeley.edu/~grabiner
I speak of MSRI and by MSRI but not for MSRI.
Shop at the Mobius Strip Mall: Always on the same side of the street!
Klein Glassworks, Torus Coffee and Donuts, Projective Airlines, etc.
Michael Kelly Perdue
Alex Kirlik wrote:
>
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
How about "Phonetic"?
Kelly Perdue
TCE Indianapolis
Glenn Rhoads
Scott Manson <SDMa...@navix.net> writes:
>> : As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
>> : "military intelligence."
>>
>> : What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>Don't know if this would qualify but I've seen this widely used
>Irregardless
I've heard it used too but it is NOT an english word! The correct form
is regardless. "Irregardless" is a double negative.
-- Glenn Rhoads
oanews
In article <52sarq$g...@mordred.gatech.edu> kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu (Alex Kirlik) writes:
>As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
>"military intelligence."
>
>What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
sometimes called a superette.
--
- Don dch...@nswc.navy.mil
Brian Tung
The puzzle on the table is:
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
Responses have included:
> nondescript (and a whole host of words beginning with "non"
> sophomore
> irregardless
As has already been pointed out, "irregardless" is not regarded (!) as
a word by any dictionary I'm aware of. It would take an awfully shameless
descriptivist dictionary to include it. Probably it's gained currency
through a shady connection with "irrespective," which is a word.
In any event, "regardless" or "irrespective," either way, I don't see
how this satisfies any definition of oxymoron. The same goes for any
word beginning with "non." These are just negatives. An oxymoron is a
phrase (could be one word) that taken one way is a contradiction in
terms, but taken another way actually makes sense. Often one way is
literal and the other way is figurative, but it doesn't have to be that.
So, for instance, take "military intelligence." (Please.) Literally,
it makes sense: that function of the military dedicated to gathering
information (broadly speaking). Calling the phrase an oxymoron is the
joke; it implies that the military is somehow incapable of intelligence,
or that intelligence precludes the military. Note the change in
meaning of "intelligence." "Jumbo shrimp" is another example that
takes advantage of double meaning. Depending on how liberally you
use the term, "wake the dead" and "civil disobedience" are also
oxymorons.
This mechanism is actually a creator of words: "sophomore" is an
example. "Oxymoron," as I pointed out earlier, is another, as is
"pianoforte." I also guessed that what the original poster might have
had in mind was a word that is its own antonym, like "cleave."
As far as the poster who said that there are no opposites, or the one
who said that the concept of opposites itself is meaningless...well,
I have no more time to waste on that sort of claptrap.
Steve Collier
Scott Manson wrote:
> Irregardless
Aagh yes I love and hate that one. Like eating lime pickle.
How about PROM and all the rest like EPROM, EEPROM
--
OECD Halden reactor project ^ fax: +47 6918 7109
Postboks 173, @ /|\ tel: +47 6918 3100
1751 Halden, _< \, '/|\` http://www.ife.no/
Norway_________________________(*)>(*)_______' | `_____I pre-fir cycling
Julie Waters
I think my favorite oxymoronic word is "pianoforte."
But my favorite oxymorons include:
"Amtrack schedule" and "Reagan administration"
:)
--Julie
--
Julie Waters, Armadillo Affectionada
ju...@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
http://data.club.cc.cmu.edu/~julie/
Keir Finlow-Bates
I think my favorite oxymoronic word is "pianoforte."
But my favorite oxymorons include:
"Amtrack schedule" and "Reagan administration"
:)
--Julie
I recently hit a problem with a spelling checker. I was clicking on a
button labelled "correct" because what I had written was what I wanted
to write, but the computer changed what I had written to the contents
of its suggest box. So there is an example of opposite meanings
contained in the same string of letters.
Keir
Chris Cole
The puzzle on the table is:
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
This question is in the rec.puzzles archive:
==> language/english/synonyms/contranym.p <==
What words are their own antonym?
==> language/english/synonyms/contranym.s <==
In his 1989 book _Crazy English_ (Pocket Books, ISBN 0-671-68907-X),
Richard Lederer calls such words and phrases "contronyms" and lists 41.
This phenomenon has also been called "self-antonymy," "auto-antonymy,"
"antiphrasis," "enantiosemy" or "enantiodromia," "Janus words,"
"antilogy," and in Arabic "didh." They can be divided into homographs
(same spelling) and homophones (same pronunciation).
A very short list of homophones:
aural, oral = heard, spoken
fiance, fiancee = female betrothed, male betrothed
raise, raze = erect, tear down
A partial list of homographs:
aboard = alongside, inside
against = in the direction of and in contact with, in an opposite
direction
aloha = hello, farewell
apparent = seeming, clear ("heir apparent")
argue = to try to prove by argument, [disputed] to argue against
arsis = lighter or shorter part, accented or longer part (of a poetic
foot)
aught = all, nothing
ave = hail, farewell
awful = inspiring respect, extremely objectionable
bad = [slang] very good, not good
barrack = root or cheer, [Australian] jeer or heckle
below par = good (in golf), bad (in health)
bill = money, statement of money owed
biweekly = twice a week, once every two weeks
bolt = to secure in place, to dart away
buckle = to fasten, to fall apart ("buildings buckle at an earthquake")
by = multiply, divide (both in math)
cakewalk = easy task, intricate walk contest
cannot praise too highly = no praise is too high, cannot praise very
highly
certain = definite, hard to specify ("I have a certain feeling.")
charter = grant for pay, use for pay
chuffed = [slang] pleased, [slang] annoyed
cipher = zero, any number
cleave = to separate, to join
clip = cut apart, fasten together
cognomen = first name, last name
commencement = beginning, [disputed] conclusion ("high school
commencement")
comprise = to contain, [disputed] to compose
continue = proceed with, (US & Scottish legal usage) postpone
copemate = antagonist, partner
critical = opposed to ("critical of"), essential to ("critical to")
custom = [noun] usual, [adjective] special
dispense with = distribute with, do without (We dispense with accuracy.)
dispose of = to place in an orderly way, to get rid of
downhill = easy, progressively worse
dress = put covering (usu. clothes) on, take covering (usu. skin) off
dust = to remove fine particles, to add fine particles
enjoin = direct or impose, prohibit or forbid
factoid = speculation reported as fact, [disputed] unimportant fact
fast = rapid, unmoving
fix = to restore, to remove part of ("The bull was fixed.")
flesh = add body matter, remove body matter
flog = to criticize harshly, to promote aggressively
for sure = certainly, [slang] certainly not
gale = a very strong wind, [archaic] a gentle breeze
gaum = to understand, to act stupid
give out = to produce, to stop being produced
go off = to become active, to become inactive
good deal = [disputed] very much (expensive), very little (bargain)
handicap = advantage (in golf), disadvantage
help = to assist, to prevent ("I cannot help it if...")
hoi polloi = the common people, [disputed] the elite
hold up = give support to, prevent
impregnable = invulnerable, [disputed] impregnatable
infer = to take a hint, [disputed] to hint
into = divided into, [India] multiplied by (math)
jake = [disputed] uncouth (person), fine
keep up = to continue to fall (rain), [disputed] to remain up
kick off = begin, die
lease = become lessor, become lessee
left = departed from ("He left."), remaining ("He was left.")
let = to permit, [archaic] to hinder
literally = actually, [disputed] figuratively (used before a metaphor)
livid = discolored by bruising, pale
lurch = run away, walk aimlessly
mean = lowly ("rose from mean beginnings"), excellent ("plays a mean
trombone")
model = archetype, copy
moot = debatable, [disputed] not worthy of debate
mortal = receiver of death, giver of death ("He dealt a mortal blow.")
mortar = glue together, blow apart
nauseous = nauseating, [disputed] nauseated
near miss = almost hit, [disputed] almost missed
nervy = showing calm courage, excitable
note = promise to pay, money
out = invisible (Turn the lights out.), visible (The moon is out.)
overlook = inspect, ignore
oversight = care, error
peep = to look quietly, to beep
peer = noble, person of equal rank
peruse = examine in detail, look over casually
pitch = erect and fix firmly in place, throw away
poke your head = make head poker, make head pokee
presently = in a little while, [archaic] immediately
put = lay, throw
put out = to generate ("candle puts out light"), to extinguish
puzzle = to pose a problem, to solve a problem
qualified = competent, limited ("The dance was a qualified success.")
quantum = very small ("quantum level"), [disputed] very large ("quantum
leap")
quite = rather, completely
ravel = entangle, disentangle
referent = something referred to, [disputed] something referring to
rent = to buy temporary use of, to sell temporary use of
resign = to quit, [hyphen recommended] to sign up again
root = to implant, to remove altogether
sanction = to approve of, [disputed] to punish
sanguine = hopeful, [obsolete for "sanguinary"] murderous
scan = to examine carefully, [disputed] to glance at quickly
screen = to show, to hide from view
seed = remove the seeds, distribute the seeds
seeded = with seeds, without seeds
set = bend, make unyielding; become established, come to an end (the era
sets)
shalom = hello, farewell
skin = to cover with, to remove outer covering
speak = express verbally, [disputed] express nonverbally
stain = color, discolor
stand = to remain stationary, [disputed] to run (as a candidate,
British)
stipulate = request explicitly, agree to
straight = not using drugs, [obsolete] under the influence of drugs
strike = to miss (baseball), to hit
table = [British] to propose, [U.S.] to set aside
take = obtain, offer ("Models take good pictures.")
take fire = withstand fire, be ignited
temper = harden (steel), soften (justice)
thalassic = pertaining to seas and oceans; pertaining to seas versus
oceans
thesis = accented part, unaccented part (in verse)
think better of = to admire more, to be suspicious of
tilt = to incline toward, to charge against
trim = to put things on ("trim a Christmas tree"), to take things off
trip = to stumble, to move gracefully ("trip the light fantastic")
tropics = area near equator, limits of this area
unbending = rigid, relaxing ("Learn to unbend.")
undersexed = having a lower-than-normal sex drive, [disputed] sexually
deprived
unqualified = [disputed] more than qualified, not qualified
vernacular = nonstandard speech, standard speech
watershed = catchment [American], divide between catchments
wear = to retain vitality, to deteriorate
weather = to withstand (a storm), to wear away
wind up = to start (a watch), to stop (a speech)
wraith = ghost of a dead person, apparition of a living person
with = alongside, against (as in fighting)
x = select (mark with an x), deselect (cross out)
yuk = to express pleasant surprise (yak), to express unpleasant surprise
(yuck)
zing = to improve (by adding zest, interest or life to), to criticize
A very very short list of contranyms from other languages:
French:
defendre = to defend, to prohibit
German:
versehen = to examine, to ignore
Kontrahent = opponent, contractor
Dutch:
ettelijk = many or much, little or few
Swedish:
maximera = set an upper limit to, make as large as possible
Sahidic dialect of Coptic:
ehrai = upwards, downwards
Latin:
immo = yes, no
A pair of French words which can be very confusing:
La symetrie (symmetry) and L'asymetrie (asymmetry).
********************************************
Instructions for Accessing the rec.puzzles Archive
INTRODUCTION
The rec.puzzles Archive is a list of puzzles, categorized by subject
area. Each puzzle includes a solution, compiled from various sources,
which is supposed to be definitive.
To request a puzzle, send a message to archive...@questrel.com
like:
return_address your_name@your_site.your_domain
send requested_puzzle_name
For example, if your net address is "mic...@disneyland.com", to request
"geometry/duck.and.fox.p", send the message:
return_address mic...@disneyland.com
send duck.and.fox
To request the index, use:
send index
To request multiple puzzles, use several "send" lines in a message.
Please refrain from requesting the entire archive via email. Use FTP.
FTP
The entire archive is also accessible via anonymous FTP, from any site
which maintains archives of the newsgroups news.answers or
rec.answers. The file part01 contains the index. The remaining files
contain alternating problem text and solution text for all the
puzzles.
Some FTP sites are:
North America:
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/puzzles/archive
ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.answers/puzzles/archive
ftp://mirrors.aol.com/pub/rtfm/usenet/news.answers/puzzles/archive
ftp://ftp.cis.ksu.edu/pub/mirrors/news.answers/puzzles/archive
Europe:
ftp://ftp.cs.ruu.nl/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS/puzzles/archive
ftp://ftp.sunet.se/pub/usenet/news.answers/puzzles/archive
Asia:
ftp://ftp.edu.tw/USENET/FAQ/news/answers/puzzles/archive
GOPHER
From the global home page, the menu choices to access the archives
at "cs.ttu.edu" are:
North America/USA/Texas/Texas Tech University, Computer Sciences
/Entertainment/Games/Puzzles
To access "uni-hohenheim.de" your menu choices are:
Europe/Germany/University of Hohenheim/Lots of Interesting Stuff
/FAQ Frequently Asked Questions/rec/puzzles/archive
WAIS
wais://xraysgi.ims.uconn.edu:8000/rpa
WEB
http://xraysgi.ims.uconn.edu/searchform.html
By keyword as well as subject.
http://einstein.et.tudelft.nl/~arlet/puzzles/index.html
Partially HTMLized.
http://www.nova.edu/Inter-Links/puzzles.html
http://xraysgi.ims.uconn.edu/others.html
A list of other sites (maintained by David Moews)
THE rec.puzzles ORACLE
This is a group of rec.puzzles regulars, who are familiar with the
rec.puzzles archive, and who will find your answer there if it exists,
or maybe compose an original answer if they are interested enough!
At any rate, they promise to respond to your question within two days,
and perhaps save you the embarrassment of posting a well-worn
question. They will respond within two days even if they do not know
the answer to your question.
To query the rec.puzzles oracle, send email containing your question
to the following address:
Carl Witthoft
In article <531j1c$f...@dot.isi.edu> br...@dot.isi.edu (Brian Tung) writes:
>The puzzle on the table is:
>> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
>example. "Oxymoron," as I pointed out earlier, is another, as is
>"pianoforte." I also guessed that what the original poster might have
Seriously, in case anyone cares, "pianoforte" is not an oxymoron,
since it's a description of the dynamic capabilities of the instrument.
For extra credit, apropos of the "chair's opposite" puzzle:
define the difference between a pianoforte and a fortepiano.
--
Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates
ca...@aoainc.com 54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201
" Axis-navigo, ergo sum."
George Barwood
ca...@aoainc.com (Carl Witthoft) wrote:
>In article <531j1c$f...@dot.isi.edu> br...@dot.isi.edu (Brian Tung) writes:
>>The puzzle on the table is:
>>> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>>
>>This mechanism is actually a creator of words: "sophomore" is an
>>example. "Oxymoron," as I pointed out earlier, is another, as is
>>"pianoforte." I also guessed that what the original poster might have
>Seriously, in case anyone cares, "pianoforte" is not an oxymoron,
>since it's a description of the dynamic capabilities of the instrument.
I think Brian Tung was not saying that pianoforte *is* an oxymoron,
only that you *could* mistakenly take it that way.
>For extra credit, apropos of the "chair's opposite" puzzle:
>define the difference between a pianoforte and a fortepiano.
I think the fortepiano was an earlier instrument with a simpler
action, but I cannot remember the exact difference.
But here's another puzzle - why was Beethoven's Op. 106 entitled
Sonate fur das Hammerclavier - was he just stating the obvious,
or is there some special significance (I do not know the answer).
George Barwood
Douglas J. Mar
> > What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
> Indescribable perhaps?
There are many self-negating words (although I don't believe that this
was what the original poster intended):
undefinable
unpronounceable
monosyllabic
French
DM
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Douglas J. Mar m...@zoltar.nrl.navy.mil |
| Materials Physics Branch, Code 6343 202-767-6244 (office) |
| Naval Research Laboratory 202-767-6295 (lab) |
| 4555 Overlook Avenue SW 202-767-1697 (fax) |
| Washington DC 20375-5000 Bldg 3, Room 409 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The views expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of U.S. |
| Government, the Department of Defense, the Navy, or my wife. |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Scott M. Harker
: What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
I know, I know! SPENDTHRIFT!
--
Scott Harker / sha...@saul.cis.upenn.edu / http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~sharker
Bill Shatzer
In a previous article, rho...@paul.rutgers.edu (Glenn Rhoads) says:
> >Irregardless
>
>I've heard it used too but it is NOT an english word! The correct form
>is regardless. "Irregardless" is a double negative.
"Irregardless" may be non-standard but it is most definitely a _real_
English word. It is listed in any reasonably complete dictionary and
has been in use for more than 80 years.
Cheers,
--
-Bill Shatzer bsha...@orednet.org-
"Look, strange women lying on their backs in ponds handing out swords ...
that's no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives
from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony."
Carl Witthoft
In article <534p58$a...@ednet2.orednet.org> bsha...@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) writes:
>"Irregardless" may be non-standard but it is most definitely a _real_
>English word. It is listed in any reasonably complete dictionary and
>has been in use for more than 80 years.
Maybe, but my Webster's7th Collegiate clearly marks it as "nonstandard."
Fred Galvin
On 2 Oct 1996, Matthew Daly wrote:
> gt4...@gypsy.cad.gatech.edu (Michael Scott Warner) writes:
> >Matthew Daly <da...@PPD.Kodak.COM> wrote:
> >>
> >>[...] However, I'll guess that you're looking for a
> >>non-self-referent word and propose:
> >>
> >>MONOSYLLABIC
> >
> >How about "hyphenated"? "uncapitalized"? "non-self-referent" :-)
>
> non-self-referent is ugly, man. I'm not going there.... :-)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You could use the words "autological" and "heterological" which were
coined the better part of a century ago:
"Let us call an adjective *autological*, if and only if it can be
validly applied to itself; *heterological*, if and only if it cannot.
"According to these definitions, the adjectives "English" and
"polysyllabic" will be autological, whereas the adjectives "French",
"monosyllabic", "red", will be heterological. Now we ask whether the
adjective "heterological" is to be considered as autological or as
heterological. . ."
This is from the discussion of "The Grelling Paradox" on p. 486 of Evert
W. Beth's treatise _The_Foundations_of_Mathematics_, North-Holland
Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1959. According to Beth, the paradox was
"published by Nelson and Grelling in 1908"; I'm not sure who coined the
words "autological" and "heterological" or when.
No doubt this is in the puzzle archive, but Ghod knows what it would be
listed under in the index; the entry "logic/self.ref" is an arithmetical
puzzle having nothing to do with logic.
> And I think you mean "capitalized".
>
> ObMore: misspelled, unrhymeable, nonsesquipedalian
>
> -Matthew
> --
> Matthew Daly I don't buy everything I read ... I haven't
> da...@ppd.kodak.com even read everything I've bought.
>
> My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer, of course.
Glenn Rhoads
bsha...@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) writes:
>> >Irregardless
>>
>>I've heard it used too but it is NOT an english word! The correct form
>>is regardless. "Irregardless" is a double negative.
>"Irregardless" may be non-standard but it is most definitely a _real_
^^^^^^^^^^^^
>English word. It is listed in any reasonably complete dictionary and
>has been in use for more than 80 years.
Sorry but it is NOT an english word. By your own admission it is
NON-STANDARD. The only reasonable (and meaningful) definition of
English is that it is part of STANDARD English. Just because there
are some people that are ignorant of the fact that regardless is the
correct word and use irregardless instead, does not make the "word"
irregardless correct. I know of no dictionary that accepts irregardless
as part of standard english. If your dictionary does, then I suggest
you throw it away and buy a good one.
-- Glenn Rhoads
MikeC-NY
Brian Tung wrote:
> As has already been pointed out, "irregardless" is not regarded (!) as
> a word......Probably it's gained currency
> through a shady connection with "irrespective," which is a word.<.....
You're giving the average speaker much more credit than he is worth. It
has gained currency because the language has deteriorated through poor
use and without regard to etiology. I know, I know, next thing someone
will say is that they 'could' care less.
While we're dancing around the periphery of oxymorons, my favorites:
1. civil war
2. marital bliss
3. Chinese cuisine
Dennis A. Sevakis
Glenn Rhoads wrote:
>
> bsha...@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) writes:
>
> >> >Irregardless
> >>
> >>I've heard it used too but it is NOT an english word! The correct form
> >>is regardless. "Irregardless" is a double negative.
>
> >"Irregardless" may be non-standard but it is most definitely a _real_
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >English word. It is listed in any reasonably complete dictionary and
> >has been in use for more than 80 years.
>
> Sorry but it is NOT an english word. By your own admission it is
> NON-STANDARD. The only reasonable (and meaningful) definition of
> English is that it is part of STANDARD English. Just because there
> are some people that are ignorant of the fact that regardless is the
> correct word and use irregardless instead, does not make the "word"
> irregardless correct. I know of no dictionary that accepts
"irregardless"
irregardless <<= again, quotes...don't confuse meta-language with
object-language.
> as part of standard english. If your dictionary does, then I suggest
> you throw it away and buy a good one.
>
> -- Glenn Rhoads
My dictionary regards "irregardless" as NonStandard and defines it as
"regardless", regardless. Regarless of whether you dictionary regards
"regardless" as Standard, my feelings regarding recycling are strong
regardless. Please RECYCLE your old dictionaries, irregardless.
Mike
Paul Filseth
ke...@harlequin.co.uk (Keir Finlow-Bates) writes:
>I recently hit a problem with a spelling checker. I was clicking on a
>button labelled "correct" because what I had written was what I wanted
>to write, but the computer changed what I had written to the contents
>of its suggest box. So there is an example of opposite meanings
>contained in the same string of letters.
The other day the driver of the car I was riding in asked "Do I
go straight here?" The guy who knew where the restaurant was replied
"Right." Much to our surprise, the driver sailed through the
intersection without turning.
--
Paul Filseth I promise to be different. I promise to be unique.
p...@lsil.com I promise not to repeat things other people say.
- Steve Martin
Bill Shatzer
In a previous article, rho...@george.rutgers.edu (Glenn Rhoads) says:
>bsha...@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) writes:
>
>>> >Irregardless
>>>
>>>I've heard it used too but it is NOT an english word! The correct form
>>>is regardless. "Irregardless" is a double negative.
>>"Irregardless" may be non-standard but it is most definitely a _real_
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>English word. It is listed in any reasonably complete dictionary and
>>has been in use for more than 80 years.
>
>Sorry but it is NOT an english word. By your own admission it is
>NON-STANDARD. The only reasonable (and meaningful) definition of
>English is that it is part of STANDARD English. Just because there
>are some people that are ignorant of the fact that regardless is the
>correct word and use irregardless instead, does not make the "word"
>irregardless correct. I know of no dictionary that accepts irregardless
>as part of standard english. If your dictionary does, then I suggest
>you throw it away and buy a good one.
NON-STANDARD English words remain real live English words! Non-standard
means nothing more than that the usage is disapproved by many but is
current in many reputable contexts.
Take, fer instance, the non-standard English word "ain't". Quite
uniformly considered _non-standard_ yet the word has been used in
writing by Mark Twain, Richard Nixon, Mike Ryoko, Cleveland
Amory, Andy Rooney, and Richard Schickel. Not to mention, Cole
Porter ("It Ain't Necessarily So!) As one would assume that Twain,
Nixon, Ryoko, Amory, Rooney, Schickel and Porter were, more or less,
writing in English, "ain't" remains a _real_ English word, even if
considered non-standard.
Once upon a time, dictionaries omitted English words the editors didn't
like. Mostly these involved four letter words for sexual or excretory
functions but they also excluded "real" English words that the
editors considered "not quite correct English". I prefer the modern
trend of including _all_ English words - non-standard, sub-standard,
vulgar, obscene, archaic, obsolete, slang. and dialectical.
And, of course, today's sub-standard is tomorrow's standard. Else,
we would still be writing, "Eft he axode, hu t^aere t^eode nama
waere b^e hi of comon. Him weas geadnwyrd b^aet hi Angnle genemnode weaeron."
Read t^ as "eth" and b^ as "thorn".
:-)
Ed Murphy
ke...@harlequin.co.uk (Keir Finlow-Bates) wrote:
> I recently hit a problem with a spelling checker. I was clicking on a
> button labelled "correct" because what I had written was what I wanted
> to write, but the computer changed what I had written to the contents
> of its suggest box. So there is an example of opposite meanings
> contained in the same string of letters.
This is a case of it mattering whether the word is a verb or an adjective.
Similar example: Most, if not all, trash cans at Disneyland are labelled
"Waste Please". (What's worse, there are occasional recycling bins labelled
"Recycle Please".)
Mariza Cabral
In article <53a7gi$r...@ednet2.orednet.org>,
Bill Shatzer <bsha...@orednet.org> wrote:
>
> [quotes of others]
>
>NON-STANDARD English words remain real live English words! Non-standard
>means nothing more than that the usage is disapproved by many but is
>current in many reputable contexts.
>
>Take, fer instance, the non-standard English word "ain't". Quite
>uniformly considered _non-standard_ yet the word has been used in
>writing by Mark Twain, Richard Nixon, Mike Ryoko, Cleveland
>Amory, Andy Rooney, and Richard Schickel. Not to mention, Cole
>Porter ("It Ain't Necessarily So!) As one would assume that Twain,
>Nixon, Ryoko, Amory, Rooney, Schickel and Porter were, more or less,
>writing in English, "ain't" remains a _real_ English word, even if
>considered non-standard.
>
>Once upon a time, dictionaries omitted English words the editors didn't
>like. Mostly these involved four letter words for sexual or excretory
>functions but they also excluded "real" English words that the
>editors considered "not quite correct English". I prefer the modern
>trend of including _all_ English words - non-standard, sub-standard,
>vulgar, obscene, archaic, obsolete, slang. and dialectical.
>
>And, of course, today's sub-standard is tomorrow's standard. Else,
>we would still be writing, "Eft he axode, hu t^aere t^eode nama
>waere b^e hi of comon. Him weas geadnwyrd b^aet hi Angnle genemnode weaeron."
>
>Read t^ as "eth" and b^ as "thorn".
I agree with what you said in general, however not as applied to the word
"irregardless" because it's a double negative intended to be a single
negative. How can "irregardless" mean the same as "regardless" if it's
the negation of "regardless"? Would "irregardful" be better? 8^) ;-)
Otherwise, yes, I agree. The word "ain't" reminds me of my English classes
taught by an American woman abroad. I asked her what "ain't" meant, as the
contraction was in the title of a song by "The Eagles" 8^), but she insisted
it wasn't a word and it meant nothing. I didn't believe her, of course.
I figured it must mean "is not", though I couldn't really see how it had
evolved phonetically. :*)
Nick Wedd
In article <53as9n$1...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>, Mariza Cabral
<mar...@u.washington.edu> writes
>
>Otherwise, yes, I agree. The word "ain't" reminds me of my English classes
>taught by an American woman abroad. I asked her what "ain't" meant, as the
>contraction was in the title of a song by "The Eagles" 8^), but she insisted
>it wasn't a word and it meant nothing. I didn't believe her, of course.
>I figured it must mean "is not", though I couldn't really see how it had
>evolved phonetically. :*)
>
from a different ancestor.
The verb "be", "am", "is" behaves now like a single verb, but those
three different-looking forms derive from different ancestors.
(Latinists will recognise the similarity with "ferro, ferre, tuli,
latum".) The "ain't" form descends from the "am" ancestor, and means
the same as "isn't". A few hundred years ago, "isn't" was normal in
some parts of England, "ain't" in others. "Isn't" seems to have pretty
much won out now.
I can't believe your English teacher was just ignorant. If I hear a
word which is new to me, I have at least a suspicion that it might mean
something. I guess that she just did not want her pupils using "ain't"
as an interesting alternative form, and failing their exams.
Nick
--
Nick Wedd ni...@maproom.demon.co.uk
Ed Murphy
MikeC-NY <Mike...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> 1. civil war
"Has there ever *really* been a *civil* war? 'Pardon me. <BLAM BLAM
BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM> I'm terribly sorry.'" -George Carlin
Steve Collier
Bill Shatzer wrote re the non-standard word 'irregardless':
> And, of course, today's sub-standard is tomorrow's standard.
*Ding* faulty logic
Some non-standard words become standard
'Irregardless' is a non-standard word
Therefore 'irregardless' will become standard
I don't think so.
Hopefully ;-) 'irregardless' will not become standard. The importance of
this cannot be understated.
Rick Banghart
In article <531bbe$2...@paul.rutgers.edu>, rho...@paul.rutgers.edu (Glenn
Rhoads) wrote:
> Scott Manson <SDMa...@navix.net> writes:
>
> >> : As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> >> : "military intelligence."
> >>
> >> : What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
> >Don't know if this would qualify but I've seen this widely used
>
> >Irregardless
>
> I've heard it used too but it is NOT an english word! The correct form
> is regardless. "Irregardless" is a double negative.
>
I'm not going to comment on whether or not it is an English word. I will
say, however, that I have seen it in an English language dictionary. (I'm
not sure which, maybe a Webster's)
-rick
Carl Witthoft
In article <SKbGfEA4C$VyE...@yendor.demon.co.uk> Edward Edmondson <Edw...@yendor.demon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <53389e$i...@gaia.aoainc.com>, Carl Witthoft <ca...@aoainc.com>
>writes
>>For extra credit, apropos of the "chair's opposite" puzzle:
>>define the difference between a pianoforte and a fortepiano.
>Fortepiano - a musical direction to play loudly then immediately quietly
Sorry, that's wrong. At least, I can say it's wrong by invoking the
no-nitpickers rule :=). Besides, Fp is really rare, as most prefer
to invoke sFz-p (sforzando-piano, probably misspelled :=( ).
There was a fortepiano as a physical object.
Bill Shatzer
In a previous article, steve....@hrp.no (Steve Collier) says:
>Bill Shatzer wrote re the non-standard word 'irregardless':
>
>> And, of course, today's sub-standard is tomorrow's standard.
>
>*Ding* faulty logic
>Some non-standard words become standard
>'Irregardless' is a non-standard word
>Therefore 'irregardless' will become standard
>
>I don't think so.
>
>Hopefully ;-) 'irregardless' will not become standard. The importance of
>this cannot be understated.
Whoa, there! I didn't say I _liked_ "irregardless" (I don't!) I
didn't say I thought it should be standard (not that either!)
I just said "irregardless" was a real live English word. "Hopefully"
too, for that matter although "hopefully" _is_ standard.
But, to change the subject slightly, consider that "fait accompli"
is another real, live English word while neither "fait" nor
"accompli" is. Puzzle me that 'un! :-)
Seth Breidbart
In article <325851...@worldnet.att.net>,
MikeC-NY <Mike...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>While we're dancing around the periphery of oxymorons, my favorites:
I always liked "fast food" because of the extra oxymoronicisms
involved.
Seth
Jeff Lipton
kir...@isye.isye.gatech.edu (Alex Kirlik) wrote:
>As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
>"military intelligence."
>What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
I believe the word is: cleave (meaning both to split [to cleave from
limb to limb] and to join [cleave two people together]).
Is this right?
Jeff
=============================
ASCII silly question, get a silly ANSI.
homepage: http://www.markomarketing.com/jlipton/welcome.html
Bill Taylor
elk...@brauer.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:
|> "bridegroom"
Nice one.
|> and "fortepiano" also come to mind.
Surely it's always been a "pianoforte" ? But yes.
Some others...
undercoat
lightweight
plughole
extraordinary
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantum particles: the dreams that stuff is made of.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor
|> >non-self-referent word
|> How about "hyphenated"?
And also, amazingly, NON-HYPHENATED !
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sentence has five words. TRUE
This sentence has not got five words. TRUE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The LIAR paradox is the UFO of the academic world!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Witthoft
In article <53e61q$5...@panix3.panix.com> se...@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>
>>While we're dancing around the periphery of oxymorons, my favorites:
>
>I always liked "fast food" because of the extra oxymoronicisms
>involved.
>
Has anyone posted "Moral Majority" yet?
Ed Murphy
bsha...@orednet.org (Bill Shatzer) wrote:
> But, to change the subject slightly, consider that "fait accompli"
> is another real, live English word while neither "fait" nor
> "accompli" is. Puzzle me that 'un! :-)
Frequency of usage, I suppose.
David Fergemann
In article <53fc38$k...@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>,
mat...@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor) wrote:
> elk...@brauer.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:
>
> |> "bridegroom"
>
> Nice one.
>
> |> and "fortepiano" also come to mind.
>
> Surely it's always been a "pianoforte" ? But yes.
>
No, the fortepiano was the predecessor of the modern pianoforte. The
keyboard is smaller and the action is different, but I don't remember
exactly how. More and more people are deciding that it's most appropriate
to perform the works of classical composers like Mozart and Beethoven on a
fortepiano, in much the same way that Bach is best played on a
harpsichord. For a picture and description of a fortepiano, see:
http://www.hubbard.qds.com/vienfort.htm
-Dave Fergemann
dsfe...@fas.harvard.edu
Scott D. Rhodes
rho...@george.rutgers.edu (Glenn Rhoads) wrote:
>Sorry but it is NOT an english word. By your own admission it is
>NON-STANDARD.
From Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition:
"*Irregardless* originated in dialectical American speech in the early
20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the
attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently
repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." THERE IS
SUCH A WORD, HOWEVER. It is still used primarily in speech, although
it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has
not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general
acceptance. Use *regardless* instead." (Emphasis added.)
>The only reasonable (and meaningful) definition of
>English is that it is part of STANDARD English.
There is no such thing as Standard English. There is no official body
that decides what constitutes Standard and Nonstandard English, as
there is with French or Icelandic. There are numerous style books,
usage manuals, etc. for English, but none has gained universal
acceptance.
>-- Glenn Rhoads
By the way, you're spelling our name wrong. :-)
- Scott D. Rhodes
Thomas R. Kettler
>elk...@brauer.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:
>
>|> "bridegroom"
>
>Nice one.
>
>|> and "fortepiano" also come to mind.
>
>Surely it's always been a "pianoforte" ? But yes.
>
>
>Some others...
>
>
>undercoat
>
>lightweight
>
>plughole
>
>extraordinary
>
How about the following:
bittersweet
monochromatic
Sincerely yours,
Thomas R. Kettler "Carpe Chocolatum"
djon...@osprey.smcm.edu
Mariza Cabral wrote:
>
> In article <53a7gi$r...@ednet2.orednet.org>,
> Bill Shatzer <bsha...@orednet.org> wrote:
> >
> > [quotes of others]
> >
> >NON-STANDARD English words remain real live English words!
>
future (Robert Sheckley?) there's mention that the double negative no
longer means a positive but rather a strong emphasis of the negative.
Before you language purists jump up outta your seats, think for
minute...
"I don't want no beans for dinner" is perfectly understandable, no one
would give that person a bean burrito and expect them to eat it (except
of course if he was a knave, etc. etc. (Gotta watch what yousay around
puzzle nuts(OOPS!))).
Additionally, the prefix "in" is a negator, (as in inoperable) yet
inflammable means...very flammable. Go figure. I wouldn't suggest using
irregardless in an NEA proposal or anything requiring a high degree of
formality, but in everyday usage, Go for it.
my 3 cents
-dj
Nick Wedd
In article <325D72...@osprey.smcm.edu>, djon...@osprey.smcm.edu
writes
>Additionally, the prefix "in" is a negator, (as in inoperable) yet
>inflammable means...very flammable. Go figure. I wouldn't suggest using
>irregardless in an NEA proposal or anything requiring a high degree of
>formality, but in everyday usage, Go for it.
I once walked through the delivery yard of a printing business. Some
printers were discussing the new batch of drums of ink, which were
labelled "flammable". They decided that this must be the opposite of
"inflammable", as previous batches were labelled. They concluded that
this must be a new, safe, non-burnable formulation of the ink.
Carl Witthoft
In article <325D72...@osprey.smcm.edu> djon...@osprey.smcm.edu writes:
>Additionally, the prefix "in" is a negator, (as in inoperable) yet
>inflammable means...very flammable. Go figure. I wouldn't suggest using
In case anyone actually wants to know (yeah, right): "in" does not
necessarily mean "not." "Inflammable" derives from "inflame" which
I hope you know does not mean "not flame."
And just think about "inject" "inseam," "intellect," ... you get
the idea: some words happen to have "in" at the start but it
is not a prefix per se. Other words have "in" as a prefix but use
it as a derivation of "into."
Lots more interesting stuff (??) on this if you study Latin.
--
Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates
ca...@aoainc.com 54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201
"Eight ever; nine never."
Bill Shatzer
In a previous article, djon...@osprey.smcm.edu () says:
>> >NON-STANDARD English words remain real live English words!
>>
>>I agree with what you said in general, however not as applied to the >word "irregardless" because it's a double negative intended to be a >single negative. How can "irregardless" mean the same as "regardless" >if it's the negation of "regardless"? Woul
>d "irregardful" be better?
>
>In a tongue in cheek, poking the ribs of intellectuals, novel set in the
>future (Robert Sheckley?) there's mention that the double negative no
>longer means a positive but rather a strong emphasis of the negative.
Indeed, at one time, "standard English" used the double negative in
just such a manner. The concept of a double negative making a
positive is a _mathematical_ principal, not a grammatical one
and there is no particular reason why the rules of grammar should
follow the rules of mathematics.
Indeed, in mathematics, a + b _must_ equal b + a, but in grammar,
an "engine fire" does _not_ equal a "fire engine". Language
is _not_ mathematics.
Nick Wedd
In article <53lspv$d...@ednet2.orednet.org>, Bill Shatzer
<bsha...@orednet.org> writes
>Indeed, in mathematics, a + b _must_ equal b + a, but in grammar,
>an "engine fire" does _not_ equal a "fire engine".
Engine fire, fire engine. That looks like a good kicking-off point for
a new direction to this thread:
houseboat boathouse
dog watch watch dog
pot plant
eye glass
child love
house-dog
race-horse
house work
beetle dung
time piece ?
Any other good ones?
Carl Witthoft
In article <vAKurKAL...@maproom.demon.co.uk> Nick Wedd <ni...@maproom.demon.co.uk> writes:
>Engine fire, fire engine. That looks like a good kicking-off point for
>a new direction to this thread:
>
>houseboat boathouse
>dog watch watch dog
>pot plant
>eye glass
>
George Carlin's :
prick finger .....
:=)
ecol...@ic3.ithaca.edu
On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Nick Wedd wrote:
> In article <53lspv$d...@ednet2.orednet.org>, Bill Shatzer
> <bsha...@orednet.org> writes
>
> >Indeed, in mathematics, a + b _must_ equal b + a, but in grammar,
> >an "engine fire" does _not_ equal a "fire engine".
>
> Engine fire, fire engine. That looks like a good kicking-off point for
> a new direction to this thread:
>
> houseboat boathouse
> dog watch watch dog
> pot plant
> eye glass
> child love
> house-dog
> race-horse
> house work
> beetle dung
> time piece ?
>
> Any other good ones?
>
> Nick
> --
> Nick Wedd ni...@maproom.demon.co.uk
How 'bout these?:
Up-keep
outlook
output
undercooked
fargone
out-going
overdo
re(:)post?
sellout
vice-presidential (watergate, iran-contra, jenifer flowers, whitewater, etc.)
I'll bet there's a lot of these. But they are fun to think about.
ta-ta
Elijah
Nat C.
In article <53lnfi$b...@gaia.aoainc.com>, Carl Witthoft <ca...@aoainc.com> wrote:
>In article <325D72...@osprey.smcm.edu> djon...@osprey.smcm.edu writes:
>>Additionally, the prefix "in" is a negator, (as in inoperable) yet
>>inflammable means...very flammable. Go figure. I wouldn't suggest using
>
>In case anyone actually wants to know (yeah, right): "in" does not
>necessarily mean "not." "Inflammable" derives from "inflame" which
>I hope you know does not mean "not flame."
>
>And just think about "inject" "inseam," "intellect," ... you get
>the idea: some words happen to have "in" at the start but it
>is not a prefix per se. Other words have "in" as a prefix but use
>it as a derivation of "into."
>Lots more interesting stuff (??) on this if you study Latin.
Actually only half the mess comes from Latin. The source of this problem
is English's hodge-podge (now is that a word?) of different languages. In
Latin "in" means "in" but in Greek "en/em" (epsilon nu/mu) means "not".
The "en" turned into "in" soon enough in English. Therefore one could
speculate that in all words with a Greek root, "in" means not and vice
versa in all words with a Latin root but that isn't always the case. We
English-speakers have bastardized so many words it isn't funny; some
doctors a few years ago name the procedure to remove brest cancer a
"lumpectomy". That is one of a very small bread of Germanic-Greek words.
Oh well. Please send my some more bastard word if you find any. I'm not
talking about anything involving "in" or anything within language groups
(like Germanic, Romance).
Nat Calloway
Nick Wedd
In article <Pine.PMDF.3.91.961013...@ic3.ithaca.edu>,
ecol...@ic3.ithaca.edu writes
>
>How 'bout these?:
>
>Up-keep
>outlook
>output
>undercooked
What's "cooked under"?
>fargone
>out-going
>overdo
>re(:)post?
>sellout
>vice-presidential (watergate, iran-contra, jenifer flowers, whitewater, etc.)
that people noticed, this side of the Atlantic.
Darren Rigby
In article <Pine.PMDF.3.91.961013...@ic3.ithaca.edu>,
<ecol...@ic3.ithaca.edu> wrote:
>
>
>On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Nick Wedd wrote:
>
>> In article <53lspv$d...@ednet2.orednet.org>, Bill Shatzer
>> <bsha...@orednet.org> writes
>>
>> >Indeed, in mathematics, a + b _must_ equal b + a, but in grammar,
>> >an "engine fire" does _not_ equal a "fire engine".
>>
>> Engine fire, fire engine. That looks like a good kicking-off point for
>> a new direction to this thread:
>>
>> houseboat boathouse
>> dog watch watch dog
>> pot plant
>> eye glass
>> child love
>> house-dog
>> race-horse
>> house work
>> beetle dung
>> time piece ?
>outlook
>output
>undercooked
>fargone
>out-going
>overdo
>re(:)post?
>sellout
>vice-presidential (watergate, iran-contra, jenifer flowers, whitewater, etc.)
hard rock (style of music)
--
djr={gridby, dart, axoq}
mikek...@gmail.com
Eric Sosman
> How about feminism?
"Conservative."
--
eso...@comcast-dot-net.invalid
Nine hundred one days to go.
Basil Jet
> On 8/3/2018 5:04 PM, mikek...@gmail.com wrote:
>> How about feminism?
>
> "Conservative."
>
--
Basil Jet - listening... NEU!. Naked Raygun. Nearly God. Negativland.
Neil Finn. Neil Young. Neils Children. Neroche. Neutral Milk Hotel. New
Musik. New Order. New York Dolls. Nick Drake. Nico. Nina Persson. Nina
Simone. Nirvana. No. Noble Lake. Nobukazu Takemura. Noel Gallagher's
High Flying Birds. Nomeansno. Normil Hawaiians. Nothing But Happiness.
Nova Mob. Oasis. October Faction. Oh Sees. Olaf Stuut. Olivier Messiaen.
Omar. Omo. On A Friday (Radiohead). Oneohtrix Point Never. Onetwo.
Opossom. Orange Juice. Orbital. Orchestral Manoeuvres In The Dark.
Organisation. Ornette Coleman. Other Lives. Out Of Focus. Outkast.
FromTheRafters
>> On 8/3/2018 5:04 PM, mikek...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> How about feminism?
>>
>> "Conservative."
>>
>
> Labour
Richard Heathfield
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
Basil Jet
Onomatopoeic
Richard Heathfield
> On 04/08/2018 12:08, FromTheRafters wrote:
>> Basil Jet wrote :
>>> On 03/08/2018 22:23, Eric Sosman wrote:
>>>> On 8/3/2018 5:04 PM, mikek...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> How about feminism?
>>>>
>>>> "Conservative."
>>>>
>>>
>>> Labour
>>
>> Invisible.
>
> Monosyllabic
>
> Onomatopoeic
Oh, wait... no.
Er, YES! Definitely... or... no. Yes! No! Ye...
Richard Heathfield
<snip>
> HETEROLOGICAL.
>
>
> Oh, wait... no.
>
> Er, YES! Definitely... or... no. Yes! No! Ye...
24 hours, not a single chuckle.
Tough crowd.
</sigh>
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
mfla...@gmail.com
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
>
> --
> Alex
> INTERNET: kir...@chmsr.gatech.edu
A little late to the party, but "Indescribable"
FromTheRafters
G
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
>
> --
> Alex
are several, like:
cleave - To cling and to split (same for clip)
fast - fixed in place and moving quickly
Downhill - can mean things are getting worse, or getting easier
etc.
G
mark_s...@hotmail.co.uk
kame...@gmail.com
> As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> "military intelligence."
>
> What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
>
>
> --
> Alex
c'mon folks: workshop, farmville, mankind...
leflynn
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 4:00:48 AM UTC-4, G wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 1, 1996 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, Alex Kirlik wrote:
> > As most people know, an oxymoron is a "contradiction in terms" ala
> > "military intelligence."
> >
> > What single (non-hyphenated) English word is an oxymoron?
prelate
firewater
L. Flynn
> > Alex
> If you mean a word that means something and the opposite of something, there
> are several, like:
>
> cleave - To cling and to split (same for clip)
> fast - fixed in place and moving quickly
> Downhill - can mean things are getting worse, or getting easier