[deleted]
A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
41–50 of 66 posts
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#42Is “cromulent” a woody or a tinny word?
Woody.
(I just like the word. It gives me confidence. Gorn ... gorn. It's got a sort of woody quality about it. Gorn. Gorn. Much better than `newspaper' or `litterbin')
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#43>While we don’t yet enter cromulent into our dictionaries, it’s a perfectly cromulent candidate for future entry.
Although the dictionary editors surely were hypnotized by their own humorousness, they ought not to have published that sentence.
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#44>While we don’t yet enter cromulent into our dictionaries, it’s a perfectly cromulent candidate for future entry. Although the dictionary editors surely were hypnotized by their own humorousness, they ought not to have published that sentence.
Why not?
M-W's lexicographers openly discuss their process of descriptively documenting language as it's observed in real use. If usage of the word "cromulent" continues to grow to the point that it reaches the threshold for inclusion, it, by definition, belongs in the (descriptive) dictionary.
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
That use of “begs the question” is unfortunate. “Raises the question” would be more cromulent, provided that cromulence can be compared.
While some may accuse you of pedantry, I applaud your embiggening others' understanding of this common mistake.
I stand by "begs the question" - it's perfectly cromulent for all "intensive purposes". (/s ~ in all seriousness, I appreciate the correction!)
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#46See also https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thagomizer which has seen adoption.
I reach for funner so often it's in my wordbag.
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#47>While we don’t yet enter cromulent into our dictionaries, it’s a perfectly cromulent candidate for future entry. Although the dictionary editors surely were hypnotized by their own humorousness, they ought not to have published that sentence.
Why not? M-W's lexicographers openly discuss their process of descriptively documenting language as it's observed in real use. If usage of the word "cromulent" continues to grow to the point that it reaches the threshold for inclusion, it, by definition, belongs in the (descriptive) dictionary.
[deleted]
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#48Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but if it was not cromulent, what would you say instead?
If it were not cromulent, one might choose a less disputatious synonym, such as "enlarge".
For unwonted synonyms I usually refer to Thesaurus.
https://www.google.ru/search?q=oh+crap+it%27s+a+thesaurus&tb...
Re: A Perfectly Cromulent Word (2016)
#50Is this related to the usage of cromulent in this submission?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28641170 >First, btrfs is a perfectly cromulent single-disk ext4 replacement. Or am I just getting that bias thing where because the word cromulent is now on my radar, I'm seeing it everywhere I look?
The later probably, cromulent was a word made up for a Simpsons episode about another made up work a while back
> a while back
Over 25 years ago, actually! Lisa the Iconoclast, which coined the words "embiggen" and "cromulent" as part of a gag, aired in February 1996.