Page 1 2 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Epicaricacy Login/Join
 
Member
Picture of C J Strolin
posted Hide Post
While we're plugging favorite words that will probably never make the OED, allow me to put in my two cents for "cocwia," the perfect response upon hearing news when you cannot determine whether the news is good or bad. It's an acronym for "Congratulations or condolences, whichever is appropriate."

I coined this little beauty some 15 or 20 years ago and despite my best efforts I can't get anyone to use it. Some friends even take a certain measure of delight at my failure, a state of mind that there must be a word for but it escapes me at the moment...
 
Posts: 1517 | Location: Illinois, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Well, I like your word, CJ! Big Grin

Here is a current use of the word (last sentence...and, no, the author is not related to me! Roll Eyes)
quote:
No, I am taking no pleasure whatsoever. In fact I am bored stiff with the whole subject.
arnie, first, let me apologize for definitely beating a dead horse. I will try to leave it alone! Wink

[This message was edited by Kalleh on Sat Mar 6th, 2004 at 12:51.]
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of shufitz
posted Hide Post
Some have been contrasting epicaricacy with schadenfreude by saying the latter is a recognized word. Edit: see note at end of this post.

True, but until recently it was not. I take this from a book published in 2003 (emphasis mine):
quote:
As recently as three years ago, a mischievous new German transplant meaning "delight in a friend's misfortune" was unknown and unpronounceable to most English speakers. Schadenfreude may still be unpronounceable, but today it is less of a novelty word amoung English speakers, and in certain circles, a staple.


Not to say that schadenfreude hadn't been previously used in English writing. So had epicaricacy, as tinman notes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: I just now found that epicaricacy is listed as an "English word" in a current and recognized, major source.

[This message was edited by shufitz on Tue Mar 9th, 2004 at 18:16.]
 
Posts: 2603 | Location: Chicago, IL USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of shufitz
posted Hide Post
Follow up on the above:

It was on May 10, 2000 that dictionary.com listed schadenfreude as its word of the day. Two of its cites are from 2000; the third (though not dated in dic.com) is from a 1999 book. That's unusual (dic.com typically will go back farther to find a good cite), and suggests that earlier cites were at best not numerous.

And I found this by Yael Wald of the University of Haifa, speaking in 1997: "Some languages (like English) do not have a single word for schadenfreude, so that if the speaker wishes to express the existence of this emotion, he or she will have to combine several words in order to create the expression."
 
Posts: 2603 | Location: Chicago, IL USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by shufitz:
Edit: I just now found that epicaricacy is listed as an "English word" in a current and recognized, major source.


Congratulations, kalleh! You have just been vindicated by Shufitz and Wikipedia. Give both a big kiss and expect copious apologies from those who doubted you!

Tinman
 
Posts: 2770 | Location: Shoreline, WA, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jheem
posted Hide Post
Sigh. There's an entry for schadenfreude in the OED 1st edition supplement. The first quote is from a Glasgow newspaper in 1922. Wikipedia is freely edited by all and sundry. In fact, Kalleh herself, or somebody on this board may have edited the entry. Soon enough, enough people may come to know, use, and believe in this mean, ugly, little non-word. Not me. All I've been asking, and looking for, is a pre-Bailey's use of the word. Anything that comes after him can be a case of people citing words that don't exist because they were in an authority, i.e., the dictionary. And, as I said earlier, everybody is free to use the E-word or any other non-word all they like. Nobody's stopping them. If I had to choose though, I'd go with epichairekakia rather than the laughable pseudo inkhorn word.
 
Posts: 1218 | Location: CaliforniaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
quote:
There's an entry for schadenfreude in the OED 1st edition supplement.
I am confused. You do consider "schadenfreude" a word, correct?

For the record, no, I didn't add to the Wikipedia. Wink

For me the following works for what is a word and what isn't a word...a question I have asked for a long time here. However this only works for older words, not up and coming words: If a word is in the OED, indeed, it is a word. If not, it isn't. Period. End of story. That, however, goes for every word, like "psaphonic." My problem with grouses about "epicaricacy" was that other words not cited in the OED seemed fine to people. It's too bad, though, about "psaphonic" because it seemed like a fine word to me, and there doesn't seem to be a synonym for it as there is for "epicaricacy."

I haven't decided on my rule about new word, though.
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jheem
posted Hide Post
quote:
There's an entry for schadenfreude in the OED 1st edition supplement.

I am confused. You do consider "schadenfreude" a word, correct?


Yes, I consider it a word, both in English and German. For what that matters. I was just responding to another post in this thread that seems to imply that schadenfreude is a new word.

quote:
For the record, no, I didn't add to the Wikipedia. Wink


Yes, I assumed you hadn't.

OK, we just have different criteria for what constitutes a word. I will not convince you, and you will not convince me. Let's just leave it at that. OK?
 
Posts: 1218 | Location: CaliforniaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jerry thomas
posted Hide Post
Here's my unsolicited comment on
epicaricacy
and schadenfreude:

Let's say you're conversing with your average American.

In a conversation about joyful feelings generated by witnessing another's tragedy, if you refer to
epicaricacy
, he might think you've switched to Arabic and say, "WHAT?"

If you explain that it's like Schadenfreude, then your average American listener might think you're talking about the shadow of an Austrian psychiatrist.

By this time, the topic of the original conversation has been lost and you're either respected for your superior knowledge or classified as a linguistic snob.

[This message was edited by jerry thomas on Wed Mar 10th, 2004 at 9:26.]
 
Posts: 6710 | Location: Kehena Beach, Hawaii, U.S.A.Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of C J Strolin
posted Hide Post
The bottom line regarding what is or isn't a word will always be simple - is the word used or not. People ultimately are the final arbiters. And, of course, as certified people both Kalleh and jheem have every right not only to speak as they please but also to champion any particular word they may fancy.

On the topic of "epicaricacy" however, I only regret that Kalleh has chosen such a thin unappealing word to champion. Kalleh, I enjoy your posts immensely (and, by the way, if I didn't I wouldn't occasionally rag on you the way I do) but I just cannot clasp this ugly little word to my bosom the way you have especially when "schadenfreude" is such a delight.


Let's compare the two words:

"Schadenfreude" rolls off the tongue and bursts into the air with a distinct "Pop"! "Epicaricacy" is all sharp syllables more reminiscent of machine gun fire.

"Schadenfreude" strikes me as being more male in nature (possibly why I prefer it) and best spoken in a lower, more masculine timbre. "Epicaricacy" seems more at home with a high-pitched somewhat whiney voice.

To me, "schadenfruede" implies a hands-open gesture with maybe a slight shrug of the shoulders thrown in as if to say "Well, whadda ya gonna do, right?" or with one's arms open as if to invite an embrace. "Epicaricacy" is the kind of word best linked with a series of sharp pokes in the unlucky listener's chest as if to say "Don't mess with me, I've got my lawyer on speed dial!"

If both words were meals, "epicaricacy" would be an order of fish, highly nutritious and undoubtedly good for you, but containing an annoying number of bones. "Schadenfruede" is definitely a meat-and-potatoes word suggesting a succulent pot roast in a crock pot with carrots and little potatoes and gravy, gravy, gravy! Can't you just smell that word?

If both words were kitchen appliances, "schadenfruede" would be that crock pot (at least one in a kitchen were a crock pot is often used) where "epicaracacy" would be the fondue set, particularly the forks, that you received as a wedding present, possibly one or two weddings back, which is now never used and yet just a bit too good to get rid of. When you put it out at a yard sale and strangers point at it and laugh.

If both words were parts of the body, "schadenfruede" would be the breasts of a pleasingly full-figured woman while "epicaricacy" would the knees and elbows of a 14-year-old male.

And, while I realize this is beginning to sound sexist on my part and I apologize for this, that last observation leads naturally to the following. If both words were women, "epicaricacy" would be Callista Flockhart or Julia Roberts while "schadenfruede," without any doubt whatsoever, would be Bette Midler.

To balance this out a bit, if both words were men "epicaracacy" would be Wally Cox (remember him?) or, at best, a young Dick Van Dyke while "schadenfruede" would have to be Tom Selleck.


I could go on (I often do) but I suppose this pretty well covers it. I'll be curious to read the feedback on this post, from Kalleh of course but also particularly from Arnie if he's still popping in on this thread from time to time.
 
Posts: 1517 | Location: Illinois, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Oy Vey! Now I have "bored arnie stiff," obviously pissed off jheem ("OK, we just have different criteria for what constitutes a word. I will not convince you, and you will not convince me. Let's just leave it at that. OK?"), and brought on a lengthy rant by CJ comparing "epicaricacy" to a fondue pot!

I am sorry, everyone. I didn't mean to be such a nag about this word.

First of all, I am convinced. Now even I hate "epicaricacy." I used to think it a delightful, English word for a transplanted German word. However, jheem has convinced me that it is really a Greek word that got misspelled, probably by some not-so-cautious writer. Besides, I prefer Bette Midler to Callista Flockhart (I'm not so sure Julia Roberts fits, there) any day!

jheem, I didn't mean to be dogmatic about what constitutes a "real" word. I just want some guidelines. I have asked this question since this site was started, and I still don't have an answer. What are your thoughts on it? I am open here. And, yes, I do change my mind, regularly.

P.S. I just did a search. Guess how many times we have used the word "epicaricacy" on this board? 80!
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of C J Strolin
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Kalleh:
Guess how many times we have used the word "epicaricacy" on this board? _80_!

And "schadenfreude" comes in second with a not-too-close 51.

Still...


Kalleh, now you've made me feel a little bit guilty like the guy, too honest for his own good, who informs a proud mother that she's got an ugly baby. Are there any more palatable words you'd like to champion? I commend your enthusiasm and will gladly join you if your next baby is not quite so hideous.
 
Posts: 1517 | Location: Illinois, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
I think that part of my object to "epicaricacy" is that it reminds me of ipecac syrup. Red Face
 
Posts: 10930 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of C J Strolin
posted Hide Post
May I suggest a new coinage:

"Ipecackicy" - Pleasure derived from seeing a friend vomit.
 
Posts: 1517 | Location: Illinois, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Kalleh:
Oy Vey! Now I have "bored arnie stiff," obviously pissed off jheem ...

They'll get over it.

quote:
I am sorry, everyone. I didn't mean to be such a nag about this word.

Don't apologize. You persevered in something you believed in. That's commendable.

quote:
Now even I hate "epicaricacy."

I wasn't crazy about it when I first saw it, but the more I said it, the better I liked it. Probably because of the alliteration. Neither schadenfruede or epicaricacy will make it into my active vocabulary - at least I hope not - but, of the two, I prefer epicaricacy.

Tinman
 
Posts: 2770 | Location: Shoreline, WA, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Oh, thanks, Tinman. For the record, Shu is annoyed with me for giving up on a word that I had once championed.

I love this site, and I especially love the respect that all our posters have for each other. I sensed a division happening that I didn't much like. While I agree with jheem that we can agree to disagree, sometimes that is easier said than done. One thing is for sure, I like wordcraft a whole lot more than I like "epicaricacy." I was not about to jeopardize some the the magic here in order to champion a word that I had never even heard of a few years ago. So, I took the gutless route.
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of shufitz
posted Hide Post
I'm not annoyed at you giving up. It's completely wise of you to say, "Let's agree to disagree."

Question to anyone here who speaks German: how is freude pronounced? One syllable, or two? All I know is how it would be pronounced in "Ode to Joy", but that may not reflect current speach.
 
Posts: 2603 | Location: Chicago, IL USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Richard English
posted Hide Post
Quote "...how is freude pronounced? One syllable, or two?..."

Two. German is phonetic.


Richard English
 
Posts: 8037 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UKReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of BobHale
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by shufitz:

Question to anyone here who speaks German: how is _freude_ pronounced? One syllable, or two? All I know is how it would be pronounced in "Ode to Joy", but that may not reflect current speach.


My previous attempt at a reply seems to have got lost in the ether.

Two is the answer. The stress is on the first syllable, the second syllable (e) is a weak schwa sound.

The vowel in the first syllable (eu) doesn't have a real equivalent in English. It's a little bit like the "oy" in "boy" but not exactly.
 
Posts: 7864 | Location: EnglandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by BobHale:
My previous attempt at a reply seems to have got lost in the ether.



As did mine, apparently. Be aware, all, that posts made during acute change-over time may have been lost.
 
Posts: 5588 | Location: Worcester, MA, USReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
How can I get one of those cute pictures?

quote:
Two is the answer. The stress is on the first syllable, the second syllable (e) is a weak schwa sound.
So, how is "schadenfreude" pronounced? Is it the German way, or has it been Anglocized? If the latter, how interesting, given some of our previous conversations! Wink
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jheem
posted Hide Post
When speaking English, I pronounce it: /'Sad@n,froyd@/ with an American English /r/.
 
Posts: 1218 | Location: CaliforniaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Richard English
posted Hide Post
Quote " ...American English /r..."

I can't be sure what is meant by this but I can say that the German "R" as in "schadenfreude" is a "back R" Very similar to the French, it is little more than a scrape in the throat.

Most English speaker find this kind of "R" tricky. The UK English "R" is halfway between the French or German "back R" and the Spanish "front R". Few native English speakers can pronounce these three different "Rs"

If you can correctly pronounce the Spanish "Burrillo" and the French "entre", then you will have mastered the three forms


Richard English
 
Posts: 8037 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UKReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
But, Richard, you do pronounce it like jheem in that the "freude" has one syllable, correct? That, of course, would be unlike the Germans pronounce it.
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jheem
posted Hide Post
There's a schwa at the end of the word, Kalleh. I pronounce it with four syllables. Richard, not all Germans use the uvular r. Where I lived in the Rhineland, it's not so far back and not trilled. Or in the dialect it mostly gets dropped. Also, it's a trilled 'r', whereas the Parisian 'r' is a uvular fricative.

The way I pronounce an 'r' is as a alveolar approximate, but a little further back than the British English 'r'. There are two 'r's in Spanish, one is a tap as in pero 'but' (with have these sound in American English, it's the 't' in city), the other is a trill as in perro dog. There's actually some other 'r' sounds. The 'l' in Tamil is a retroflex 'r' and almost sounds pharyngealized.
 
Posts: 1218 | Location: CaliforniaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Richard English
posted Hide Post
Indeed. There are many variations of the consonant "r". I didn't mean to suggest that there are only three but wanted to make a fairly obvious distinction.

I cited two of the most extreme just to make that point clear but, as we all surely know, there are huge differences in pronunciation of almost all letters - even in one country.


Richard English
 
Posts: 8037 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UKReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of BobHale
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Kalleh:
How can I get one of those cute pictures?



Go > My Space > Profile
Edit Profile
Scroll down to Edit Your Avatar and click

Either choose from the list or upload from any 48x48 picture that you have already created and stored on your own computer
 
Posts: 7864 | Location: EnglandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of C J Strolin
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jheem:
Also, it's a trilled 'r', whereas the Parisian 'r' is a uvular fricative.

The 'l' in Tamil is a retroflex 'r' and almost sounds pharyngealized.

Is it just me or would "Pharyngealized Uvular Fricative" make a great name for a band?!
 
Posts: 1517 | Location: Illinois, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Well, I am familiar with the the uvula and the pharynx, but I am running to the dictionary for "fricative." Having just read that paper that Bob posted about what is a word, I am feeling very uninformed about linguistics these days!
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jheem
posted Hide Post
You can categorize consonants by both place and manner of articulation. For place we've got bilabial, labio-dental, dental, alveolar, palatal, velar, uvular, pharyngeal, and glottal: moving from lips to vocal chords. For manner we've got stop (a closure is made at some place in the vocal tract and the flow of air is 'stopped', aka plosive, e.g., p, b, t, d, k, g), fricative (a constriction is made at place of articulation, e.g., f, v, th, sh, zh), affricates (a stop and a fricative combined, e.g., pf, ts, dz), and nasals (stoppage made as in stops, but air pushed thru nasal cavity, e.g., m, n, ng). There's more to phonology than this, but this gives you a quite idea of the variety of sounds.
 
Posts: 1218 | Location: CaliforniaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
A lot can happen in a week...

Maybe, just maybe, this e-word is becoming more widely used than we realized.

In today's Chicago Sun Times's Quick Takes (by Zay Smith) column:

Ryan Matzner, a Tallahassee, Fla., reader writes, "You say that 'strategy' and 'tactics' are not synonyms. Well, dictionary.com seems to disagree. I agree that dictionary.com isn't the Oxford English Dictionary, but the site is quickly becoming considered the official dictionary of the Internet."

Response by Zay Smith:

"Would you trust an Internet dictionary that can't even explain the relationship between 'epicaricacy' and 'schadenfreude?'"

My, my.
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
I seem to remember Kalleh posting in the past that Zay Smith has visited this site. I don't suppose he (or she) is one of Kalleh's sock puppets?
Cool


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10930 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
No, I don't have sock puppets. However, since you asked Wink, I do have a guilty conscience so I will come clean. When I sent him the answer that aput gave us about the 6th extinction on earth, I did happen to mention "epicaricacy" and that we've talked about it on our site.

Sheesh, why does arnie always bring out my guilt complex? Roll Eyes
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
quote:
I did happen to mention "epicaricacy"
Yes, it's the sort of word I happen to mention every day, as well. Razz


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10930 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of jheem
posted Hide Post
It should be ineffable as far as I'm concerned.
 
Posts: 1218 | Location: CaliforniaReply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 


Copyright © 2002-12