"Hapax logomenon" means a word or phrase where there is only one recorded use of a word. Does this mean the word can only appear once anywhere? Or, does it mean that it is only cited once in a given source (such as the Bible)? Could it also mean that it only appears in one dictionary? Do you know an example of a hapax logomenon?

I've never heard of it before. But Wikipedia has. And Wictionary quotes Steven Pinker:

quote:

---

2000: There is a lovely technical term for a word that appears once in a body of text: a hapax legomenon, plural hapax legomena, Greek for "once said." The term comes from philology, the study of old texts. — Steven Pinker, Words and Rules ISBN 0-465-07269-0, page 172.

---

See the Usage Note, too.

Tinman

You may want to google "Googlewhack".

It's the internet version of Hapax Logomenon. Some people have far too much time on their hands...

Do you know an example of a hapax logomenon?

Epicaricacy. It only occurs in Bailey's dictionary.

Actually, I thought of that, jheem. However, it is in Mrs. Bryne's Dictionary (that's how I found it in the first place), as well as Tsuwm's Worthless Word for the Day Dictionary and Luciferous Logolepsy.

Oh, Sigg, we used to play googlewhack, and I think it is quite fun! But, then, maybe I just have too much time on my hands. I found the site you recommended and really kind of like "unmerciless politician" as well as "insolvent pachyderms." The funny part is, now neither is a true googlewhack. The first has 2 pages of sites and the second has 4. Just posting them as googlewhacks apparently brought them sites!

However, it is in Mrs. Bryne's Dictionary (that's how I found it in the first place), as well as Tsuwm's Worthless Word for the Day Dictionary and Luciferous Logolepsy.

Yes, but they got it from Bailey's. Actually, it's not a hapax because, as far as I can tell, it doesn't occur anywhere but in dictionaries.

K., just ran across a hapax legomenon while looking up a word in a Hebrew etymological dictionary. The word is shabbəlul (שבלול) 'snail'. It occurs in Psalms lviii.9. Extra points if you can deduce the Hebrew word I was looking up, and which occurs a few entries on.

Actually, it's not a hapax because, as far as I can tell, it doesn't occur anywhere but in dictionaries.

What do you mean by "anywhere else?" There are 195 citations on Google. Or, is "anywhere else" a published paper or book? If so, how would we know? Not that I want to beat a dead horse or anything...

More seriously, in order to be a 'hapax' does it have to appear in something besides a dictionary? In other words, does it have to be used as a word, rather than just cited as one?

More seriously, in order to be a 'hapax' does it have to appear in something besides a dictionary? In other words, does it have to be used as a word, rather than just cited as one?

Yes, the term originally meant a word that appears only in Homer (Iliad/Odyssey), and the way that it was used in the dictionary I looked at this morning is that it's a hapax in the Bible. So, it usually refers to a closed corpus. So, is shabbəlul not a hapax anymore because I've used it? No.

To continue flogging the ex-horse: dictionaries list words that exist before they do: whether in speech or literature. A word that exists only in a dictionary is quite strange; that's what lexicographers (and I) call an inkhorn term. My hesitation with the e-word is that it doesn't seem to have existed before Bailey's. Recently, I've been leaning towards the theory that Bailey got it from somebody who heard the Greek word pronounced in the English manner and mistranscribed the word in a letter or book (unknown to us, or maybe even lost).

Kalleh, how about Poe's "tintinabulation?" (In his poem, "The Bells") Does that qualify as a one-use word?

"Tintinabulation" has 1500 sites on Google; I am guessing it is published somewhere else. I wonder how people know a word is only in one source, though. Couldn't "shabbəlul" or "epicaricacy" or "tintinabulation" be used in some book somewhere that we haven't read? How do we know that a word is just in one source?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalleh:
"Tintinabulation" has 1500 sites on Google;

---

But prior to the internet, wasn't it ONLY used by Poe? He made it up!

Couldn't "shabbəlul" or "epicaricacy" or "tintinabulation" be used in some book somewhere that we haven't read? How do we know that a word is just in one source?

Sure, but the term (hapax legomenon) comes from Classical Philology which for most purposes has a closed corpus. Not only that but it's one you can easily get on CD-ROM for research. If some word only occurs within this corpus once, it's a hapax. Or if shabbəlul only occurs once in the Tanakh / Old Testament, then it is, too, by extension. Poe wrote in Modern / Present Day English, and that corpus is not closed yet (i.e., we're still speaking and writing in it). The e-word isn't really a hapax, it's an inkhorn termin that it occurs in a few dictionaries, but nobody has yet proved it exists outside of Bailey's et al. (Note, as soon as somebody points me at a book with the e-word in it, printed before Bailey's dictionary, I'll be happy to say that the e-word is a strange, little word. (It may turn out that Bailey got it from a dictionary in turn or made it up: these are all possibilities.)

Tintinnabulation was coined from the Latin adjective tintinnabulatus 'belled' < tintinnabulum 'a bell, signal bell; cow-bell' < tintinno 'to ring, clink, clank, jingle' (a reduplicated form of tinnio 'to ring, clink, tinkle', whence English tinnitus 'a ringing in the ears'). Whether Poe coined the word or not is moot.

NB, the spelling with four ns.

you guys are cruel, evil and mean. How could you destroy my Saturday morning with something like Googlewhacking.

My shriek of "I got one" nearly made poor Rex drop the coffee pot. Closely followed by "Oh poop. It's a dictionary page."

FYI the term being whacked was boustrophedonic hapax -- only one page, but it was a dictionary listing which is of course a Googlejack.

whimper... how could you?

quote:

---

Originally posted by jo:
you guys are cruel, evil and mean. How could you destroy my Saturday morning with something like Googlewhacking.

---

Buy and read this book and you'll realise how lightly you have escaped if all that you lose is a Saturday morning.

I saw the live show. It was hilarious.

(Note, as soon as somebody points me at a book with the e-word in it, printed before Bailey's dictionary, I'll be happy to say that the e-word is a strange, little word.

Well, that's easy. Now all I have to do is read all the books before Bailey's was printed. I have always wondered, jheem, why you call it a "little" word. Do you mean insignificant? And, why stange? I mean, let's say I find that it really had been used fairly frequently before the Bailey's. Would you still consider it "strange" and "little?" Also, I suppose it could have been used only in conversation and not in print. Then we'd never know. Surely there weren't as many documents and books printed in those days, as there are now.

quote:

---

But prior to the internet, wasn't it ONLY used by Poe? He made it up!

---

Oh no he didn't! While he might have used the spelling "tintinabulation" in his MS, "tintinnabulation", with four "n"s, was used before The Bells. See here. We certainly can't describe this word as a hapax logomenon.

I have always wondered, jheem, why you call it a "little" word. Do you mean insignificant? And, why stange?

We been over this, K., but little because I don't like the word aesthetically, so I say little to belittle it. Strange because it doesn't look like a learned Greek word (used by Aristotle no less) should in English. Then there's the suspicious fact that it would be a perfectly useful word, in that anybody I've ever met instantly understands what schadenfreude is. Try that with hapax legomenon or postmodernism.

Hapaxlegomenon is a property of corpora, and is quite different from a claim of invention. Typically hapaxlegomenon relates to a corpus of an ancient language, such as Old English or Biblical Hebrew, where a finite amount survives and we are unlikely to uncover significantly more. A word that occurs only once in the entirety of surviving Old English is just a rare word; it is just unfortunate that we have no other surviving texts in which it was used. To the people who did write it it was often a normal word. The surviving occurrence is unlikely to be the first use, or a conscious coinage.

That's how hapaxlegomenon is normally used: talking of such ancient, finite corpora. But there are also instances where we know or are pretty confident the first surviving use was actually the coinage of the word. So Whewell coined 'scientist', and the passage in which he uses it (as I recall) states that he proposes to coin the word for this purpose. Back in the 1600s Sir Thomas Browne profligately coined dozens if not hundreds of words, almost none of which have survived ('commensal' is one that has), and probably few of which were ever reused by anyone else. These one-offs are usually glossed in bigger dictionaries, because Browne was an important writer and his words often required a considerable knowledge of obscure Latin roots to understand. We could call them hapaxlegomena, if Browne himself only used them in one place, though he might have repeated them.

But the word is more usually applied to ancient sources, or perhaps sources such as newly deciphered languages, as here being a hapaxlegomenon presents a philological problem. Given a Latin or Greek dictionary you can work out what a Browne word means; but an Old English word that occurs just once might not have enough context, and might not be recognizably cognate with anything else. It might be an error, and with nothing to compare it to we can only speculate.

It is so great having all you linguists here to educate us mere mortals. Aput, I am curious; I see that you use hapaxlegomenon as one word, but the dictionary uses it as 2 words. Can it be used both ways?

The word is shabbəlul (שבלול) 'snail'. It occurs in Psalms lviii.9. Extra points if you can deduce the Hebrew word I was looking up, and which occurs a few entries on.

jheem, I asked Shu about this word, and he didn't know. Can you give us all a hint?

As I understand it, the terms hapex legomenon, inkhorn term and nonce-word mean three different things.

• A hapex legomenon is, as aput says, a word that appears only once in a specified body of writing. For instance, I've seen it claimed that among Shakespeare's plays, Taming of the Shrew has more hapex legomena than any other play, and among the books of the Bible, The Book of Job has more hapex legomena than any other. I suppose this can be relevant if one is to determine whether a particular work is by a certain author: count the number of words in it that the author did not use elsewhere.
  
  So too, the body of work one is refering to can be the entire body of all written English.
  
  
• An inkhorn term is a ridiculously obscure and erudite-sounding word, typically of latinate or greek appearance, used in a pretensious attempt to appear learned.
  
  
• A nonce word is one created by the author for a specific occasion, not expecting it to be used again. For example, in an episode of The Simpsons, Bart makes up the word kwyjibo during a game of Scrabble and, when pressed, asserts that it means "a big, dumb, balding North American ape. With no chin." Perhaps more commonly, an author might coin a nonce word as shorthand for a concept he is elucidating in his writing.

Now I could be completely off on any or all of this, mind you!

Can you give us all a hint?

I was looking up the word shibboleth which occurs in a Hebrew dictionary just a word or two below shabbəlul.

Well, that makes sense. And, now we have a thread about shibboleth, too!