Timeline for Is "horrorest" a correct English word?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2015 at 15:20 | comment | added | J.R.♦ | @Isaac - True, the OP is asking if this is a "correct English word," and horrorest is not one of those. But that's not what your answer says. Your answer says, "not a word of any kind, nor any usage," and that's where your brevity (not precision) has gotten you into trouble. A word is simply "a single unit of written or spoken language," so, technically, horrorest is a word. You may not find it in dictionaries, and you can't use it in Scrabble, but it's nonetheless a word, much like ain't, qubit, borogoves, Catan, Hogwartsean, dadgummest and other "words" my spellchecker underlines. | |
| Apr 17, 2015 at 14:50 | comment | added | Isaac | JR - One thing I've learned from being a programmer, (& English forums can benefit from this pursuit/discipline perhaps even MORE, if that's possible) is the necessity & value to be precise. People write things that are not words all the time. That's fine-in those cases their goal isn't necessarily to output words, it's to engage & entertain. The question by itself--& even more so within the context of this forum--is clearly asking if the word is a correct English word. It's not. Sorry, no amount of semantics can change that, and the silliness of this entire discussion makes my point nicely. | |
| Apr 17, 2015 at 8:48 | comment | added | J.R.♦ | Isaac, programming forums have an advantage in this regard: if I'm skeptical that your proposed solution will work, I can just compile it and see for myself. Languages like English don't work quite like Java, which is why the English forums appreciate at least one or two substantiating references. Moreover, I don't fully agree with pazzo's answer, but I do appreciate the way it links to a headline reading Horror Horrorer Horrorest. There it is, in black and white – clearly some kind of word, in some kind of usage. If it's not functioning as a word there, then what is it? | |
| Apr 16, 2015 at 17:48 | comment | added | Isaac | DcShannon: Point taken - I didn't notice it. But perhaps that demonstrates MY point a bit well, too. I didn't notice it among the extraordinary amount of noise present on the page. Pazzo: No. JR: Sometimes they can, but this isn't the case. I come from programming forums where often less is more. Say the correct answer and move on. Some explanation and background is sometimes warranted, but most of the time it serves the world best to refer the OP to a link where they can do their own additional homework, rather than feeling you must write the world in your answer. | |
| Apr 16, 2015 at 17:17 | comment | added | sumelic | @pazzo: we can write plenty of things that are not words. Fnarbability, fghfgjfgj, jhkuil5d, jukioyb. There. No one would say those are words in English. | |
| Apr 16, 2015 at 15:45 | comment | added | user6951 | If it is not a word, of any kind, how could you write it? | |
| Apr 16, 2015 at 9:04 | comment | added | J.R.♦ | The problem with "simple answers" is that they can sometimes be wrong. Adding references to support or substantiate a stated position is what makes a contribution an authoritative answer, instead of just an opinion or assertion. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 21:01 | comment | added | DCShannon | Welcome to ELL Stack Exchange! Answers like this can sometimes be useful, as we can get a little pedantic at times, however one of the answers on this page already has the simple answer at the top in bold, before going into more detail afterward. Is there a reason you felt this was insufficient? | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 20:59 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 15, 2015 at 23:11 | |||||
| Apr 15, 2015 at 20:58 | history | answered | Isaac | CC BY-SA 3.0 |