[Lexicog] Re: Dibs on coining "googleitous" & "googletudinous"

[Fritz Goerling]

May I throw a googly? Where do "google", "google-eyed", "googly-eyed"come
from?

 

Fritz Goerling

I'm chuckling over the comments made about Google. Interesting 
comments about law & culture and strategy on the part of the players.
My own "dibs" on coinagehood here (root (G/google) + suffix 
(itious/tudinous)is based on: 1) having been hereby recorded (not 
even recognized yet by Google -- but rather resulting in the search 
response(s) -- "Your search - "googleitious"//"googletudinous" -- did 
not match any documents. Suggestions.... 1) make sure all words are 
spelled correctly. 2) Try different keywords 3) Try more general 
keywords" 
These responses were ironically satisfying -- not hitting on any 
pages in a search (now technically copyrighted...and coined). And 
think of it -- no recorded use out of a google of web pages out 
there. They therefore fit the category of "unique" -- 2) 
the 'category shifts' in usage fulfilling the requisite conditions 
for coinageability (I'd like credit for that, too, since Google gave 
me the same "No standard web pages containing all your search items 
("coinageability") were found. (Perhaps a linguist who HAD used them 
would beg to differ -- please let me know.) 
Obviously, I won't get credit for them, but it may be technically 
true that no one had recorded their use before. I am fully convinced, 
though, that another person of higher lights will get credit for 
them, by virtue of being used by a celebrity, or on the academic 
significance of the contexing document. Perhaps in the same way the 
great coiners of the ages were credited with their coinages. 
Hats off to Fred & Rudy for engendering the point in the first 
place. 

Scott Nelson

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20070524/4a8ba3d7/attachment.htm>