Swans TV Inventing New Words

[BSA5]

Yes, but as I said on page 1 of this thread, the Americans are not picky about their "English" dictionaries.

And that would be common "use", not "usage". ;-) ("Usage in the context" is correct, though. Your usage I mean, not the journo's, since the word doesn't exist. Clear as mud?)

Well I am a little/lot drunk, so any mistakes I made I blame on that. I can't even decipher whether I made a mistake of not. Everything's a little blurry. Which I guess calls into question why I'm on RWO, but at the moment it's this or Hamish and Andy, so....

But "summated" is definitely a word, albeit an unusual one, and incorrectly used in the OP's example. It just wasn't made up, is the point.

[Kirkari]

Well I am a little/lot drunk, so any mistakes I made I blame on that. I can't even decipher whether I made a mistake of not. Everything's a little blurry. Which I guess calls into question why I'm on RWO, but at the moment it's this or Hamish and Andy, so....

But "summated" is definitely a word, albeit an unusual one, and incorrectly used in the OP's example. It just wasn't made up, is the point.

I have the utmost respect for drunk posting. Especially on a Thursday - congrats!

OK, so the journo didn't make it up, and since it's in a couple of (inferior) dictionaries, he/she probably has a bit of an excuse for using it. But someone did, probably when they couldn't remember the correct and perfectly adequate existing word(s), and not long enough ago for me to be happy about it. I know, language is a living, evolving thing, blah, blah, blah. Clearly I am not. ;-) When it gets into the OED I may reconsider.

[Swansongster]

OK. It has been doing the email rounds for years but I liked it enough to save it.

>WHY THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IS SUCH A JOY TO LEARN!
>1) The bandage was wound around the wound.
>2) The farm was used to produce produce.
>3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.
>4) We must polish the Polish furniture.
>5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.
>6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
>7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to
>present the present.
>8) A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.
>9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.
>10) I did not object to the object.
>11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.
>12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
>13) They were too close to the door to close it.
>14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.
>15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.
>16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
>17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
>18) After a number of injections my jaw got number.
>19) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.
>20) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
>21) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?
>
>Let's face it - English is a crazy language.
>
>There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger; neither apple nor
>pine in pineapple.
>
>English muffins weren't invented in England nor French fries in France..
>
>Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren't sweet, are meat.
>
>We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find
>that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square and a guinea
>pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.
>
>And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers don't
>groce and hammers don't ham?
>
>If the plural of tooth is teeth, why isn't the plural of booth beeth?
>One goose, 2 geese.
>So one moose, 2 meese?
>One index, 2 indices?
>
>Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend, that
>you comb through annals of history but not a single annal?
>
>If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of
>them, what do you call it?
>
>If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught?
>
>If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?
>
>Sometimes I think all the English speakers should be committed to an
>asylum for the verbally insane.
>
>In what language do people recite at a play and play at a recital?
>
>Ship by truck and send cargo by ship?
>
>Have noses that run and feet that smell?
>
>How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man
>and a wise guy are opposites?
>
>How can overlook and oversee be opposites, while quite a lot and quite
>a few are alike?
>
>How can the weather be hot as hell one day and cold as hell another?
>
>Have you noticed that we talk about certain things only when they are
>absent?
>
>Have you ever seen a horseful carriage or a strapful gown?
>
>Met a sung hero or experienced requited love?
>
>Have you ever run into someone who was combobulated, gruntled, ruly or
>peccable?
>
>And where are all those people who ARE spring chickens or who would
>ACTUALLY hurt a fly?
>
>You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your
>house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by
>filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on.
>
>English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the
>creativity of the human race (which, of course, isn't a race at all).
>
>That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the
>lights are out, they are invisible. And why, when I wind up my watch, I
>start it, but when I windup this essay, I end it.
>hmmmmmmm?

[wolftone57]

One of the beauties of language is that it is an organic creation, and that new words can be, and are, created all the time. Sometimes they are used as a one-off, other times they become part of the fabric of the language by repeated use and eventually become accepted as a "real word". I love creating non-words by combining two existing "real words". If it is obvious what a created word means, I don't see there is an issue with this. It just adds more colour and playfulness to language.

The test here should surely be whether it was understood what was meant by using this "non-word" "summated". I think most would say it was understood. Hence I don't see there is an issue with it.

Liz in Journalism there is a definite problem with this usage and the words that are invented are invented in context to the vernacular of the day or as a pun or joke. Those words used in these contexts enter the vernacular or the official dictionaries. This usage is just a common mistake in the belief the word was valid. This word is not common usage as yet then it is a non-word as it is not a recognised word in any context, either the vernacular or in official dictionary definitions.

[wolftone57]

What about my personal favourites. Everythink & Somethink

Only ever as slang as they have entered the vernacular but they are bastardisations of other words that have correct spellings with a g on the end

[wolftone57]

Summated wasn't corrected by my iPhone so it's most definitely a worm.

I'd get my IPhone tested Al. I looked up the Webster which is the American Dictionary & it isn't there so I don't know where Apple are getting their dictionary from

[wolftone57]

No, it's definitely a word. Google it if you want.

Sorry BSA5 but Google is not a recognised source of academic or necessarily correct information. Words that have been used on Google correct or incorrect will appear in a Google word search. Google is a search engine and the terms do not have to be correct they just have to appear in some form of documentation that has passed through the Google Web.

[wolftone57]

So the English language was completely static prior to 1990?

I think it much more likely that since the advent of the www, these things happen much quicker being exposed to a large portion of the community at one time, rather than piece meal that was previously the case.

Not completely static but words took far longer to be recognised because they had to be proven to be in common usage in both oral and written form. The internet has changed this dramatically & with the net have come so many Cyber Words that it is so hard to even contemplate counting them. there is actually a dictionary of Cyber Words all on their little lonesome. The other thing is Text ot TXT speak & that is a completely new language on its own

[Yuri H]

Wait, "nom" isn't a word?

[Big Al]

I'd get my IPhone tested Al. I looked up the Webster which is the American Dictionary & it isn't there so I don't know where Apple are getting their dictionary from

If you can use it in a sentence I reckon it's a word.

Summated - Father to a friend "I'm sorry the cake is all gone because my summated"

[BSA5]

Sorry BSA5 but Google is not a recognised source of academic or necessarily correct information. Words that have been used on Google correct or incorrect will appear in a Google word search. Google is a search engine and the terms do not have to be correct they just have to appear in some form of documentation that has passed through the Google Web.

I'm not suggesting that because it appears in Google, it exists. I'm not an idiot. However, Googling the word does take you to reliable sources in which the word is used.

[Peace]

Meh.. summated - definition of summated by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Edit- interestingly, wiktionary doesn't have summated in it's library. It probably isn't a word... http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Specia...ted&go=Look+up


Pronunciated is a favorite of mine after a huge fight with the missus about it not being a real word... She was right of course, took me a while to accept it

[Dosser]

Maybe we can start our own reference site, like 'wikifootyspeak' (or somethink) then we can all become rich and famous.

[aardvark]

Maybe we can start our own reference site, like 'wikifootyspeak' (or somethink) then we can all become rich and famous.

Hmmm...I like the rich and famous bit.......

[supersall]

My head hurts