Talk:List of autological words

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion.
Please see prior discussions before even considering re-nomination:

I disagree that incomplet is a word.

I would argue that "verbify" is not autological. In fact, I'd argue that any word that wasn't an adjective would be unable to meet the definition of autological. Maybe nouns could do it too...but that would probably have to be a subtly different definition. Maybe "belongs to the set of objects designated by itself." Paul Hope 3 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)

It might be distinguish among the claims for kinds of nouns (or noun-phrases) that function differently logically: proper names, (in)definite descriptions, sortals.

The word "noun" itself is autological, as it is a noun.

Some (arguably) autological verbs:
  • be
  • exist
  • mean
  • record
  • document
Of course whether "mean" counts depends on whether it makes sense to include transitive verbs with the object unspecified. If there were a verb meaning "to be a verb", then this would be autological. -- Smjg 11:13, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Would "to become a verb" count under a progressive sense of "to be a verb"? (This in other languages would be an aspect change.) If so then we can count "verbify" (above). ThomasWinwood 21:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
All the OneLook hits return no other meaning but "make into a verb". Do you have a dictionary that has "be a verb" or "become a verb" as an alternative meaning? -- Smjg 11:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Virge says: I just moved "dactylic" over to the list of heterological words. While "dactyl" takes its primary accent on the first syllable, "dactylic" is pronounced as an amphibrach, vis., dak-'ti-lik.

Edparsons adds: Similarly 'iamb' is trochaic, not iambic. I'll fix it. I'd also argue that spondee is trochaic, and hence not autological.


If you include words based on context then you will need to add words like “missing” and “omitted”. But remember as soon as you add them you will have to remove them, at which point they will be eligible for inclusion again. Have fun! RLS 2005-10-03

yeah those are fun. how about "wrong" or "disagreed"? they create the same paradox, just as the word heterological does.--Lygophile 07:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't listed and included fit too or member, for that matter. Furthermore why are uninformative or descriptive there?

As discussed on its page, neologism was initially autological but has now become heterological (when?) through no fault of its own!

Contents

[edit] 1337sp34k?

I take issue to the description of "1337sp34k" as being autological. 1337sp34k describes a particular slang and style of typing used on the internet; wheras the word "1337sp34k" is merely written in that particular style. The word is not the language. --Krsont 17:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

  • so? the same counts for typefaces, for CAPITOLS, for legible. 1337 refers to what it is itself, that makes it autological.--Lygophile 06:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Awkwardnessful

Awkwardnessful is POV, as are many other entries. Bobby1011 03:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I agree. - Sikon 05:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree as well. If you want to have a list of autological words, you should try sticking with real words. I challenge anybody to use awkwardnessful in a sentence. Frenchgeek 07:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
I took out non-words and POV words.129.98.212.72 06:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mispelled and the like

Technically, the word "mispelled" is not mispelled, it's misspelled. "Mispelled" isn't even a valid word. - Sikon 10:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. If you write " There was a big fuontain in the square", did you (1) Not write the word fountain at all, or did you (2) Write the word fountain, but do so in the wrong way? If, as you claim, mispelled isn't a word at all, then if fuontain also isn't a word, doesn't it follow that, e.g., there's not a word between big and in, in the above sentence?
technically, you attempted to write the word fountain, but failed--Lygophile 00:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it would be fair to write mispelled in the article, but add a note saying that for various reasons spelling errors have been left intact in the article. I think originally it said sic.

[edit] Metaphor

Why is metaphor a metaphor? (i'm dumb :)

  • I don't believe it is, and it certainly isn't an adjective.


[edit] Self Referential

I dont actually see that self-referential counts, as the "self" refers to the noun it describes; the word "myself" has the word self in it, but the self there doesn't refer to the word "myself".... 8.8.202.167 00:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I removed it. Omphaloscope » talk 22:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
i dont know about self-referential, but the noun selfreference sure counts, at least in context, or in present context, as it refers to itself as being autological. so it would be both, just as autological. just as agreed, example and arguable would in that context be both.--Lygophile 06:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] well..

the link provided within this page links to a list which contains many words i disagree with. such as random keyboard slammings. i dont see how that is autological. also it says its really hard to make up autological words on your own. iv never heard of such a thing and am able to make up tons within mere minutes. shall i just add some? well they did say to be bold in editing, so i will then.--Lygophile 06:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deletion?

why is this page nominated for deletion? i never knew about it untill i came across it accidently. is this not informative?--Lygophile 07:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

If you follow the link there, you can see why it's nominated (and give your opinion there, if you wish). I nominated it because of exactly the point you make in your above comment--it's a trivial category. E.g. Non-human is a word on the list. Well then, just about any "non-word" is a word. Similarly "untentacled" is an example given on the list linked to in external sources in the article. Oh, whatever, just follow the link to the discussion on the AfD page. JudahH 20:57, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] verbify dubious asertion)?

it says that on the page but why? if you use the word verbify you verbify the word verb, so its autological right? unless..well the word is verbified, but it doesnt verbify itself. but verbified is all of a sudden an adjective:D

ow but wait, if you verbify by saying verbify, :/ - maybe "verbifying" would do better?--Lygophile 04:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  • i think verbified would fit the criteria. The word genuinly describes itself. As opposed to verbify, because the word verbify neither verbifies istself, nor describes itself because it isn't an adjective. THE KING 03:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] expand?

maybe we should expand this article as an actual article about and distincting autological (a word describing itself as a word); homological (a word with 2 (or more) implimentations that describe one another, such as selfreferential names like 'moon'); heterological (basically every word that can imply something dissimilar with the word itself or imply two things that are incomparible yet not homonymous, that is, are of related origin or directly derived from eachother and not distinct enough to count as two seperate words, yet are used in different ways giving a dissimilar disscription, such as incredible, but usually used to mean non-homological or non-autological); and contralogical (any heterology with two implications contradicting eachother such as 'long')

i just made all this stuff up though--Lygophile 14:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The only problem i see with that (and i think its a great idea) is that the NOR pushers would probably eat you for breakfast. Also, if you did manage to fend them off long enough to write a decent article, the listophobes would them claim that the list (which would then be part of an article) was uninformative and superflous. So basically if i was going to do it, i'd do it at Autological and link to this article, rather than doing it at the top of this one. But its a great idea. THE KING 03:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sextadecaliteral

searching that word in google caomes up with seven pages that use that word. all seven pages are a mirror of this article. is it even a word?. Lygophile has spoken 07:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I was discussing with a mate the other day about the politics of NOR, and we decided that this is a great example of an article where most of the words are unsourced, but nevertheless self evident and therefore valuable to the encyclopedia. This article was cited in our debate as a part of the counter-argument to NOR. It's definitely a case of WP:IAR. Sextadecaliteral is exactly the sort of word we want in there, and before i even got to this talk page i had decided it was my favourite autological word. So in response to your comment lygophile, its an original research/neologism but lets ignore all rules and include it anyway. THE KING 03:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007-02-25 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 13:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_autological_words_6f88.html"