|
Yesterday I saw the word "unadditised" in an Esso advertisement on television. Even if it is a trendy word, I'm never going to use it. I'd much sooner say "not containing additives", which is what I assume it means.
|
As the resident pedant, you may imagine my incoherent splutters of rage when I saw the caveat, "compared with non add..........", on the ESSO advertisment.
No, I can't repeat the word - it is so truly awful.
Ignorami, both the agency who used the word and ESSO who must have signed off the offending advertisement.
|
|
Ya can't even put a Tiger in yer tank these days. Rules Mate. Rules, they 'ave to be obeyed see.
|
|
Don't they have to say "May contain nuts" even if it doesn't, just in case?
|
Roger old chap.... If you are a pedant so am I and don't you take this the wrong way but I believe you to be an ignoramus in your use of "ignorami" .....:0).
There is no such word as ignorami...
As with most singular nouns ending in -s, the plural of "ignoramus" is formed by adding -es. So when one ignoramus hooks up with another, you have a couple of ignoramuses.
True, "ignoramus" is a Latin loan word, but it's derived from a verb ("ignorare")--unlike, say, "stimulus," which comes from a noun and is one of the few Latin borrowings to retain the plural ending of -i
Last edited by: retpocileh on Fri 14 Sep 12 at 08:33
|
>> As with most singular nouns ending in -s, the plural of "ignoramus" is formed by
>> adding -es. So when one ignoramus hooks up with another, you have a couple of
>> ignoramuses.
>>
>> True, "ignoramus" is a Latin loan word, but it's derived from a verb ("ignorare")--unlike, say,
>> "stimulus," which comes from a noun and is one of the few Latin borrowings to
>> retain the plural ending of -i
What a coincidence. That's exactly what Richard Nordquist said! tinyurl.com/2g3h7xb
;-)
Last edited by: L'escargot on Fri 14 Sep 12 at 08:40
|
Of course it is Snail ... I knew the word 'ignorami 'was wrong anyway , very nearly as wrong as 'unadditised ' ..... and I knew it was wrong because of my latin studies at school over 50 years ago .
The Nordquist explanation was very succinct.....my typing skills are minimal....
....so a quick cut and paste....
|
>> very nearly as wrong as 'unadditised '
>>
Yup, definately wrong. It should be "unadditized".
No Brit would come up with a horrendous neologism like that, so it must have been foisted on us by the Septics. Hence the "z".
I propose the reintroduction of burning at the stake for linguistic heresies.
|
Seems a useful word to me. Tells me something in one word something that takes L'escargot three to say the same thing.
|
>> Seems a useful word to me. Tells me something in one word something that takes
>> L'escargot three to say the same thing.
>>
It seems to mean "pure" then? As in "pure drinking water" which hasn't had any additives.
|
>> It seems to mean "pure" then? As in "pure drinking water" which hasn't had any
>> additives.
>>
Yes, but "pure" makes it sound better (no contaminants in it), whereas they want it to sound worse (important things left out).
You can bet that a team of advertising droids had that argument on their way to coining the neologism under discussion.
|
>> ........... and I knew it was wrong because
>> of my latin studies at school over 50 years ago .
At the end of my course of Latin my teacher said I spoke Latin like a native!
|
As long as its not in the dictionary already, you can make up any word you like, and no-one can argue its wrong. Thats the beauty of English and the reason it has morphed into global use.
Fortunately all you pedants are not the controllers or arbiters of what the rest of us speak or write
So Nuts.
|
>>
>> So Nuts.
>>
I said that.
|
>At the end of my course of Latin my teacher said I spoke Latin like a native!<
I had a pal who was like that with Esperanto.
|
It's it's I think you'll find
8O)
|
>> It's it's I think you'll find
>>
>>
>> 8O)
Not any more.
|
>> So Nuts.
>>
Whole Hazel nuts...............Oooh! Cadbur.................................
|
|
Additive is a word that should not be verbified.
|
I`m not a Pedant, not clever enough! - but in my humble opinion,
>>So when one ignoramus hooks up with another, you have a couple of ignoramuses.
Me would have thought that you would have a "Pair" of Ignoramuses!
|
|
I thought the collective noun for ignoramuses was a thicket? :o)
|
|
I wood leaf it at that, before we branch off on a tangent.
|
|
I thought that wood bring out our man from the branch line.
|
>> Additive is a word that should not be verbified.
>>
Er, "verbitised" surely.......?
If we do manage to stamp this out and it rears its ugly head again in the future, will it have been reverberated?
|
|
Zero feels Englishuosity may acceptably morphate, but commonulous erroraciousness gaining his popularious acceptology can be concernumentary when the applicandium are political - vide withcraftantium or slaveitudeiousness.
|
|
Prof Stanley Unwin a relation?
|
Leonard Sachs of "The Good old Days" more like!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-x4VBVmIDg
|
Unadditised - Roger.
