Droll?

[Phil C.]

As a child, the word "droll" always bugged me. It just sounded, sort of
"wrong". I assumed, until I learned better, that it meant "dull" or
"dreary". Perhaps because it was slightly close-ish to them in sound.
(But then lots of words are much closer to other words. OTTOMH snug is
close to smug and slug yet still sounds "right") Even knowing the true
meaning for many years still can't make it sound quite "right". Anyone
else? Or any other comparable words that just sound, sort of, "wrong"?

I'm not sure whether the "droll" example falls within the definition of
"phantonym". Too subjective and vague, perhaps? Is there a better term?

<Thinks> Or is it just me?
--
Phil C.

[John Hall]

In article <IMSdnYzCx7c0CorM...@bt.com>,

I think it's just you. :) To me, the word "droll" sounds just right for
its meaning.
--
John Hall

"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."
Oscar Wilde

[Dev]

In article <IMSdnYzCx7c0CorM...@bt.com>,

Phil C. <phil...@fsmail.net> wrote:
> As a child, the word "droll" always bugged me. It just sounded, sort of
> "wrong". I assumed, until I learned better, that it meant "dull" or
> "dreary". Perhaps because it was slightly close-ish to them in sound.
> (But then lots of words are much closer to other words. OTTOMH snug is
> close to smug and slug yet still sounds "right") Even knowing the true
> meaning for many years still can't make it sound quite "right". Anyone
> else? Or any other comparable words that just sound, sort of, "wrong"?

'Flaccid', apparently, as everyone seems to think it rhymes with 'placid':
so much so that the dictionary pronunciation (Chambers) has changed within
half my lifetime.

> I'm not sure whether the "droll" example falls within the definition of
> "phantonym". Too subjective and vague, perhaps? Is there a better term?

> <Thinks> Or is it just me?

Being droll, d'y'mean?

--
Dev

Om Namah Shivaya | Om Para-meshwaraya namaha

[Phil C.]

On 10/02/2013 18:59, Dev wrote:
> In article <IMSdnYzCx7c0CorM...@bt.com>,
> Phil C. <phil...@fsmail.net> wrote:
>> As a child, the word "droll" always bugged me. It just sounded, sort of
>> "wrong". I assumed, until I learned better, that it meant "dull" or
>> "dreary". Perhaps because it was slightly close-ish to them in sound.
>> (But then lots of words are much closer to other words. OTTOMH snug is
>> close to smug and slug yet still sounds "right") Even knowing the true
>> meaning for many years still can't make it sound quite "right". Anyone
>> else? Or any other comparable words that just sound, sort of, "wrong"?
>
> 'Flaccid', apparently, as everyone seems to think it rhymes with 'placid':
> so much so that the dictionary pronunciation (Chambers) has changed within
> half my lifetime.

I can't remember how 'droll' came up (memory not what it was) - I was
chatting to someone who also found it odd. 'Flaccid' certainly seems odd
if it doesn't/didn't rhyme with 'placid'. I didn't know that. So I
didn't feel quite so alone in the universe. I suppose words are like
sub-atomic particles - just looking at them too hard seems to change
their nature. (And that's deeply profound that is - honest, mister)

Other 'wrong' words that occur to me are 'crapulous', 'scatological',
limpid, bucolic.
--
Phil C.

[Ildhund]

Pulchritude
--
Noel

[Phil C.]

On 21/02/2013 10:27, Ildhund wrote:
> Pulchritude

Very good one!
Kibble ("bucket in mine" sense), gurney, hemlock...?

If "phantonym" doesn't quite fit, perhaps we need a new term for these
words - preferably one that just doesn't... sort of... sound quite right.
--
Phil C.

[Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:07:23 +0000, "Phil C." <phil...@fsmail.net>
wrote:

Weirdinyms.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England (BrE)

[Phil C.]

Yes. That will do nicely for the name of a strange sub-linguistic
particle. <Thinks> I suppose you could spell it "wierdinyms" to make it
even weirder (at the risk of giving someone apoplexy.)

There's a sub-class of proper names. Skype, Cillit Bang.
--
Phil C.