words you're sure exist, but actually don't

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

1. submersive (tried submergent as well - ms word not having it).

The Boy Who Can Go Inside The TV (dog latin), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:05 (fourteen years ago)

2. epucious.

The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:06 (fourteen years ago)

it's funny when this happens, because this happens to me all the time and usually i'm thinking of a completely different word. In this case, I think the closest correct word is something like "immersive" which MS Word likes, but somehow Google spellcheck doesn't. I want a word that means "engulfing" or "plunging" or "burying", but an adjective.

The Boy Who Can Go Inside The TV (dog latin), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:12 (fourteen years ago)

conflagrant (/conflagrance); the art of presumptuously joining words and presuming that others will understand

stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:18 (fourteen years ago)

okay it turns out that actually exists

stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:20 (fourteen years ago)

You should only become the superuser when absolutely necessary. Doing otherwise is dangerous, stupid, and in poor taste. Create a user account for yourself now!

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:21 (fourteen years ago)

superuser
The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.

Mark G, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:22 (fourteen years ago)

click on THIS bitch

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:24 (fourteen years ago)

3. Rubik

I actually lost $20 to a friend once because I honestly really thought this was an actual, dictionary defined word. Was thinking of "cubit"

frogbs, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:49 (fourteen years ago)

or rubric?

Mark G, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:51 (fourteen years ago)

cubit's rube

The Boy Who Can Go Inside The TV (dog latin), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:54 (fourteen years ago)

xp yeah that one too

frogbs, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:55 (fourteen years ago)

I feel like superuser is a legit word. A compound word of existing ones. We're allowed to make this stuff up, right? Like wingspace, handspan etc. Am I wrong about that?

Kim, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 14:57 (fourteen years ago)

anything can be a word. Even Scourpeity

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:03 (fourteen years ago)

mentous

40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:08 (fourteen years ago)

http://current.org/current/avatars/Humpty_Dumpty_Tenniel.jpg

free inappropriate education (Abbbottt), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:08 (fourteen years ago)

Because English isn't his first langugae my dad gets confused and makes up his own words all the time. Then we fight because he's sure they exist and are real. My favorite of these is assinating which he uses all the time.

\(^o\) (/o^)/ (ENBB), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:11 (fourteen years ago)

to half kill someone?

♪♫ hey there lamp post, feelin' whiney ♪♫ (darraghmac), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:12 (fourteen years ago)

to be as interesting as a lady's behind?

40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:12 (fourteen years ago)

Abbbot otm

40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:13 (fourteen years ago)

Sort of related - he's started using "jack shit" all the time lately. I guess he heard someone use it as in "you don't know jack shit about ________ " or whatever but he's not using it that way. He seems to be using it like one would bullshit or horseshit. Anything he doesn't like is now "jack shit". I've told him this isn't a phrase that way but he doesn't seem to care.

\(^o\) (/o^)/ (ENBB), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:14 (fourteen years ago)

my daughetr makes u p words like "I catch-ted it!" in stead of caught - I am tempted to leave it cause its cute - but I usually correct.
also she refers to Cortaid as "acorns"

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:14 (fourteen years ago)

to be as interesting as a lady's behind?

i.e. very interesting

Tom D has taken many months to run this thread to ground (Tom D.), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:15 (fourteen years ago)

x-post - Assinating seems to be a combination of asinine and irritating or something like that.

\(^o\) (/o^)/ (ENBB), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:15 (fourteen years ago)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/resourcing?show=0&t=1307461389

sometimes all it takes is a healthy dose of continental indiepop (tomofthenest), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:43 (fourteen years ago)

so what word am i thinking of w/r/t "something that submerges or envelopes you" in the form of an adjective?

The Boy Who Can Go Inside The TV (dog latin), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 15:59 (fourteen years ago)

I alwys think its good to use wonderful to mean "full of wonder" - like " I am wonderful as to what will happen next"

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:02 (fourteen years ago)

immersive is legit

what made my hamburger disappear (WmC), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:03 (fourteen years ago)

submergent

40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:03 (fourteen years ago)

it's a word, whether Word thinks so or not

40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:03 (fourteen years ago)

dl you may be thinking of "submersible" (another word for submarine), which does sort of hint at a root form of something like "submersive"

40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:05 (fourteen years ago)

word does not like submergent, neither does google autocheck. Google doesn't like immersive either. Weird.

The Boy Who Can Go Inside The TV (dog latin), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:07 (fourteen years ago)

also there are like 3 million medical terms not in any dictionary - like cystourethrogram - although microprogrammed is allowed

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 16:09 (fourteen years ago)

circlitude
diminicity

Aimless, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 17:28 (fourteen years ago)

besnazz

Aimless, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 17:29 (fourteen years ago)

irregardless

Latham Green, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 17:30 (fourteen years ago)

minisculish

Aimless, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 17:42 (fourteen years ago)

OpenOffice and Firefox don't believe but 'entwinement' is a word but the dictionary does. FUCK YOUS YA BAWBAGS.

Antoine Bugleboy (Merdeyeux), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 18:00 (fourteen years ago)

The IPod Touch's spellchecker always tries to change the word 'ill' to 'I'll'.

Christine Green Leafy Dragon Indigo, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 18:19 (fourteen years ago)

sloppery

piscesx, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 19:03 (fourteen years ago)

devaluarian

Aimless, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 20:08 (fourteen years ago)

http://canvaspaint.org/3f170.png

Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 20:17 (fourteen years ago)

The IPod Touch's spellchecker always tries to change the word 'ill' to 'I'll'.

Yeah that one gives me the shits.

“this dog won’t hunt” doesn’t appear in the Book of Proverbs (Trayce), Wednesday, 8 June 2011 02:03 (fourteen years ago)

clitter

remy bean, Wednesday, 8 June 2011 02:26 (fourteen years ago)

appendice

stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Friday, 17 June 2011 17:17 (fourteen years ago)

Why is the word "internet" always capitalised to "Internet" with spellcheckers? Is there a reason?

the Sandalled Vandal (dog latin), Friday, 24 June 2011 15:37 (fourteen years ago)

Oh, man, "internet" vs. "Internet" is a whole thing. The AP and NYT style guides capitalize it; CNN, the FT and the London Times do not. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_capitalization_conventions .

Whitey G. Bulgergarten (Phil D.), Friday, 24 June 2011 15:41 (fourteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.