Skip to main content

RULY, RECK, and RobWords

There is a certain amount of linguistic Zen that comes from playing simple word unscrambler games, spinning around the question of why some words are accepted and others are not.  A few nights back we played UNRULY, and for fun, I tried RULY on a whim, and the game accepted it, when I know other games have rejected it.  I tried explaining it to Anne.  It felt like a word to me, and it's in Merriam-Webster with the same example I thought of at the time: "I have seen some ruly crowds."  It turns out that MW has a fascinating story about these two words, see here.  "Ruly" did exist for centuries, got replaced by UNRULY, only to come back as a back-formation from UNRULY to fill the gap it once filled.  

It turns out that these cases are considered "Lost positives", words where the positive root word has faded from usage while the negation of the word is still going strong.  Here is a video from RobWords that gives a good overview.  I have been enjoying his content a lot, and hope to discuss some other episodes soon.

A google NGram shows "ruly" was barely a blip at any time since 1800, with "unruly" being between 40 to 400 times as common.  Oddly, UNRULY sounds pretty commonly used to me, but it took a big dip from 1840 to 1970 and has rebounded since then.

There are a lot of other words that feel the same, like INEPT being a thing, but you cannot be "ept".  In this case, the word is actually a variant of INAPT, the opposite of APT.  This is the most interesting NGram out of today's batch, since in 1846, the two lines cross at 0.000015%, and again in 1895 at 0.00001%, though today the two are at: 0.000069% INEPT and 0.0000062 INAPT (1/10 as common but neither word is dead).  Being able to compare the word counts on these millions of documents is fascinating.  Here you go.


You can be NONCHALANT but nobody is "chalant"* anymore.  "Chalant" it not entirely missing, though, but never more than 0.000015%, where NONCHALANT has spiked by a factor of 8X since 1980.

You can be RECKLESS and there is a verb and archaic adjective "reck" (to worry or care for), but you can not "reckful"*.  Again, you can conjure a Google NGram to see the usage rise and fall, and there is a tiny tiny trace of "reckful", with this entertaining quote from "The Political Economy of the Bible" in "The North British Review, Volume 2, 1845": "Man should be reckless in nothing, but reckful in every thing; and the only question is, what, in the concern of marriage is it, that he should reck or reckon upon?"  It does a fine job of showing how the words support and oppose each other.  I did not even think of RECKON as a now obvious relative.
The few remaining cases in the entire Google corpus sound equally like plays on words.

INNOCENT vs "nocent"?  Well, "nocent" was around in the 15th century, and Rob gives an example from 1685 (meaning "harmful"), but INNOCENT is by far the more widely used word.  A google Ngram has NOCENT barely used at all after 1860.

UNCOUTH vs COUTH?  Though Rob says COUTH is obsolete, MW has both words, even with modern examples of COUTH, but COUTH still sounds like a relic.  A Google Ngram (1800-2022) shows COUTH peaked at 0.00003% in 1807 and dropped to nearly zero (0.000001%) since then, even UNCOUTH has dropped signifcantly (0.0002% in 1853 down to 0.00005% in 2022).
UNCOUTH had 9X the usage of COUTH in 1807 and was 28X as common in 2022.

INCESSANT vs "cessant"*.  "Cessant" did show up as a blip on the radar in the early 1800s, peaking around 0.000005%, while INCESSANT rose up to a peak of 0.0006% in 1837 (100x as common as "cessant"), and has declined greatly since then, hitting 0.00019% in 2022, 500X as frequent as the tiny trace of "cessant" that is still measurable, but only 1/3 as common as it was at its peak.

I just wanted to bring up this fascinating category of words, and trace them with some of the tools at hand.

#

* These are not in Merriam-Webster online.  When I try to do a deeper dive into the dozens of available dictionaries on any words, it gets confusing.  MW feels like a good middle-of-the-road non-specialist source.  Again, what makes a word truly a word?




Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A STORY about STOREY

Here is another case where two words differ in American/British meaning based on an extra E: STORY and STOREY. You can tell a STORY, it's a piece of narration or fiction, or a news story.  I don't normally think of it as a verb, but it can be.  I would normally say I was telling a STORY, but I could be STORYING.  Having finished the STORY, I suppose I am all STORIED out.  But, STORIED fits as an adjective too: if many stories have been told about you, you have lived a STORIED life. STOREY is a floor in a house, and to make matters a little more complex, in the British Isles, what we call the first floor (Am) is the ground floor and our second floor is their first storey (floor).  A taller building could have multiple STOREYS.  Merriam-Webster says that this STOREY is just a less common version of STORY, but it always felt to me like a specifically British version.  Cambridge has STOREYED, which would be used as an adjective, as in "a three-storeyed ho...
Post a Comment
Read more

Poor Frankenstein

Names can get mixed up, too. Real or fictional people can become legends, or end up garbled and forgotten. A classic case is poor Frankenstein. If you're picturing the big lumbering monster with the bolts in his neck ... oops. Frankenstein was the doctor who created the monster. The monster was simply known as "the monster" or "Frankenstein's Monster." Strangely, "Franken-" has become a prefix on its own. I've heard big ugly things named that way, from a Frankencouch to a Frankenpuppy. I wonder if this was urged along by the old FrankenBerry cereal? Sure is a weird thing to make a prefix out of, especially considering the original Franken- thing was not a monster, but a mad scientist. Now, where does Al Franken fit into all this?
2 comments
Read more

Similar but Not: Byre/Bier

Sometimes when rushing through a puzzle app, swiping words so quickly, the actual words can become a blur.  I am used to telling Anne about alternate American/English versions of words, like COLOR (Am) vs COLOUR (Eng) and NITER (Am) vs NITRE (Eng).  So I got into a blur where I ended up thinking BYRE and BIER were the same word, just different dialect spellings. But no, a BYRE is a shed for a cow, and a BIER is a typically wooden platform for carrying the dead.  So, if you have cattle, you can get them into the BYRE, but if you have a corpse or coffin to carry to a gravesite, a BIER would be the thing. In German, BIER is just BEER. And while swiping those letters, I misspelled BIER as BRIE, which is a soft spreadable cheese, like cream cheese.  I can't remember the last time I actually had some, but I seem to recall it looked like cream cheese but tasted skunky and awful.
Post a Comment
Read more