| Author |
Message |
Martin Cleaver
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
raymond o'hara
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:01 pm
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
"Martin Cleaver" <mrjcleaver@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fe8dba6a.0412040029.67b95e3f@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance lists this word.
It is new to me, and seemingly unused and indeed,
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance undefined!
Is this just reference.com creating new words just to determine
whether they can influence usage?
Then, say it does becomes real, how would one pronounce it? My g/f
reckons bun-challi-ance... :D
Thanks, Martin.
|
Adding bunch to alliance to create a word that means alliance seems stupid
to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 6:02 pm
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
Martin Cleaver <mrjcleaver@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance lists this word.
It is new to me, and seemingly unused and indeed,
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance undefined!
Is this just reference.com creating new words just to determine
whether they can influence usage?
Then, say it does becomes real, how would one pronounce it? My g/f
reckons bun-challi-ance... 
|
For some reason, your first URL does not work for me at the moment.
My first thought is that "bunchalliance" is simply a typo for "bunch,
alliance". We've seen typos in dictionaries before. Some of the old
dictionaries like Webster's 1913 don't scan in perfectly. And the old
story about "Dord" from "D or d" was a true one, I think.
Looking further... Onelook.com has no results for the word. Google turns
up (theoretically) 353 uses, but only displays 8, most of them being
this same string:
...blend, bond, brotherhood, bunchalliance, cahoots, cause...
What argues *against* it being a typo is that the words are in
alphabetical order, which "alliance" by itself would not be.
There is exactly one hit that appears to use "bunchalliance" in a
meaningful way, but neither its page nor its cached version will load
for me; maybe you'll have more luck:
For the Boston Red Sox
... The Boston fans can now have more of a
bunchalliance relationship with their baseball
team that is normally only reserved for teams and
fans who have won a ...
www.igl.net/wwwplat/messages/532.shtml - 101k -
Cached - Similar pages
So it still could be some rare, dialectal, archaic sort of thing.
Interesting mystery.
--
Best wishes -- Donna Richoux
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 6:03 pm
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
Martin Cleaver wrote:
| Quote: | http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance lists this word.
It is new to me, and seemingly unused and indeed,
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance undefined!
Is this just reference.com creating new words just to determine
whether they can influence usage?
Then, say it does becomes real, how would one pronounce it? My g/f
reckons bun-challi-ance... :D
Thanks, Martin.
|
They cite Roget 2004 so I would guess a simple typo for "bunch [space
omitted] alliance" scanned in and uncorrected.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Cunningham
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 6:59 pm
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 12:14:25 +0100, trio@euronet.nl (Donna
Richoux) said:
[...]
| Quote: | And the old
story about "Dord" from "D or d" was a true one, I think.
|
My copy of _Webster's New International Dictionary Second
Edition_ does indeed have
dord ([dOrd]) _Physics & Chem._ Density.
Until now I've never read anything that expressed any doubt
that it came from someone writing "D or d Density" on one of
the slips of paper G. & C. Merriam Company used for their
archive of definitions.
Last I heard, Merriam-Webster, Inc., still used slips of
paper for that purpose. It seems incredible that they would
not yet have put it all into computer files. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Heindl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 12:04 am
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
trio@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
| Quote: | There is exactly one hit that appears to use "bunchalliance" in a
meaningful way, but neither its page nor its cached version will load
for me; maybe you'll have more luck:
For the Boston Red Sox
... The Boston fans can now have more of a
bunchalliance relationship with their baseball
team that is normally only reserved for teams and
fans who have won a ...
www.igl.net/wwwplat/messages/532.shtml - 101k -
Cached - Similar pages
So it still could be some rare, dialectal, archaic sort of thing.
Interesting mystery.
|
This page contains a bunch of highlighted esoteric (and misused) words,
such as despoliation, onomatopoeia, and termagant. I suspect it was
written by a sports fan using the same online thesaurus as started this
discussion.
--
Ray Heindl
(remove the Xs to reply to: xvortren-news@yaxhoo.com) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jerry_friedman@yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:38 am
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
Ray Heindl wrote:
| Quote: | trio@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
There is exactly one hit that appears to use "bunchalliance" in a
meaningful way, but neither its page nor its cached version will
load
for me; maybe you'll have more luck:
For the Boston Red Sox
... The Boston fans can now have more of a
bunchalliance relationship with their baseball
team that is normally only reserved for teams and
fans who have won a ...
www.igl.net/wwwplat/messages/532.shtml - 101k -
Cached - Similar pages
So it still could be some rare, dialectal, archaic sort of thing.
Interesting mystery.
This page contains a bunch of highlighted esoteric (and misused)
words,
such as despoliation, onomatopoeia, and termagant. I suspect it was
written by a sports fan using the same online thesaurus as started
this
discussion.
|
Indeed, it ends "EDITORS NOTE: Just in case you are wondering what this
post is about, I am a true blue Cardinals fan and lost a bet. The loser
had to post in the Platinum Forum about the winning team and include 20
words (21 with SBs addition) that were hand picked by FTG and Junie.
These 21 words have been placed in the text with the bold format so
they will be easily found. I do want to personally thank FTG, Junie and
SB for their help in this bet. I knew up front that the words would not
be easy to fit into text, but never dreamed I would be the one having
to place this post. LOL"
I thought he did okay calling Lady Luck a termagant. I agree with you
about other misuses, though.
--
Jerry Friedman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Holmes
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 12:01 pm
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
jerry_friedman@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: |
I thought he did okay calling Lady Luck a termagant. I agree with you
about other misuses, though.
|
It must be time for another visit to the optometrist -- having just read
the 'worser and worser' thread, I was wondering whose missuses you
thought were termagants.
Hypo-hyphenation has its drawbacks.
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus those of alt.usage.english
at tpg dot com dot au |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Heindl
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:06 am
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
"jerry_friedman@yahoo.com" <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Ray Heindl wrote:
This page contains a bunch of highlighted esoteric (and misused)
words,
such as despoliation, onomatopoeia, and termagant. I suspect it
was written by a sports fan using the same online thesaurus as
started this discussion.
Indeed, it ends "EDITORS NOTE: Just in case you are wondering what
this post is about, I am a true blue Cardinals fan and lost a bet.
The loser had to post in the Platinum Forum about the winning team
and include 20 words (21 with SBs addition) that were hand picked
by FTG and Junie. These 21 words have been placed in the text with
the bold format so they will be easily found. I do want to
personally thank FTG, Junie and SB for their help in this bet. I
knew up front that the words would not be easy to fit into text,
but never dreamed I would be the one having to place this post.
LOL"
I thought he did okay calling Lady Luck a termagant. I agree with
you about other misuses, though.
|
I tuned out too quickly to make it as far down as the editor's note.
But I wonder where the writer found a definition of "bunchalliance" in
order to figure out how to use it -- probably the same thesaurus site.
Or maybe FTG and Junie provided definitions.
--
Ray Heindl
(remove the Xs to reply to: xvortren-news@yaxhoo.com) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hagrinas Mivali
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 12:11 am
Post subject: Re: bunchalliance? |
|
|
Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | Martin Cleaver <mrjcleaver@gmail.com> wrote:
http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance lists this
word. It is new to me, and seemingly unused and indeed,
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bunchalliance undefined!
Is this just reference.com creating new words just to determine
whether they can influence usage?
Then, say it does becomes real, how would one pronounce it? My g/f
reckons bun-challi-ance... :D
For some reason, your first URL does not work for me at the moment.
My first thought is that "bunchalliance" is simply a typo for "bunch,
alliance". We've seen typos in dictionaries before. Some of the old
dictionaries like Webster's 1913 don't scan in perfectly. And the old
story about "Dord" from "D or d" was a true one, I think.
|
Perhaps they had a dordy copy editor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in