This is an interesting point. You're right - no byline or dateline. Not great things on a "News" platform.
But that begs the question: is Hacker News a "news" site? Despite having "news" in the name, I prefer to think of it more as a "Directory of Mostly Wonderful [Hacker] Things". At least, that's what I lurk here.
I used to have a t-shirt from a now-defunct television recap website that said “perfectly cromulent” and it was the best “in joke” shirt. Would always bring out the fellow Simpsons nerds.
(I just like the word. It gives me confidence. Gorn ... gorn. It's got a sort of woody quality about it. Gorn. Gorn. Much better than `newspaper' or `litterbin')
M-W's lexicographers openly discuss their process of descriptively documenting language as it's observed in real use. If usage of the word "cromulent" continues to grow to the point that it reaches the threshold for inclusion, it, by definition, belongs in the (descriptive) dictionary.
If we hold the M-W editors to the standard of only using "real" words, then a contradiction is present.
If "cromulent" has not yet reached their threshold for inclusion, then they themselves should not be using it in casual language. Contrapositively, if they are using it casual language, then presumably it has reached their threshold for inclusion as a word.
For them to casually use the word as though it were real after arguing that it is not harms their credibility as arbiters of what words are or are not real, despite the comedic value of them doing so here.
What a pretentious way to say acceptable. If I ever hear anyone using cromulent unironically I'll automatically think they're a douchbag and avoid them. Language is suppose to be simple so you can... IDK, communicate. Stuff like this is cringe and not at all based or red pilled. Downboated.
love made up words! this reminds me of "The Meaning of Liff", the "dictionary of things that there aren't any words for yet" by Douglas Adams & John Lloyd. here's an online version (with dubious legality?): http://www.lib.ru/ADAMS/liff.txt_with-big-pictures.html
65 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 141 ms ] threadhttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/embiggen
A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man.
It's a century older.
Merriam may not know, but the OED does:
https://www.lexico.com/definition/embiggen
https://www.google.ru/search?q=oh+crap+it%27s+a+thesaurus&tb...
> A noble spirit encromulates the smallest man.
> For large P , the three-form fluxes are dilute, and the gradient of the Myers potential encouraging an anti-D3 to embiggen is very mild.
And yes, I use both words all the time.
Please don't do this.
But that begs the question: is Hacker News a "news" site? Despite having "news" in the name, I prefer to think of it more as a "Directory of Mostly Wonderful [Hacker] Things". At least, that's what I lurk here.
Makes sense since it’s a line that says who it’s by :v
(I’m not kidding. Same episode! Hint: 3F13.)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28641170
>First, btrfs is a perfectly cromulent single-disk ext4 replacement.
Or am I just getting that bias thing where because the word cromulent is now on my radar, I'm seeing it everywhere I look?
Over 25 years ago, actually! Lisa the Iconoclast, which coined the words "embiggen" and "cromulent" as part of a gag, aired in February 1996.
(I just like the word. It gives me confidence. Gorn ... gorn. It's got a sort of woody quality about it. Gorn. Gorn. Much better than `newspaper' or `litterbin')
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-word-ok-was-in...
Although the dictionary editors surely were hypnotized by their own humorousness, they ought not to have published that sentence.
M-W's lexicographers openly discuss their process of descriptively documenting language as it's observed in real use. If usage of the word "cromulent" continues to grow to the point that it reaches the threshold for inclusion, it, by definition, belongs in the (descriptive) dictionary.
If "cromulent" has not yet reached their threshold for inclusion, then they themselves should not be using it in casual language. Contrapositively, if they are using it casual language, then presumably it has reached their threshold for inclusion as a word.
For them to casually use the word as though it were real after arguing that it is not harms their credibility as arbiters of what words are or are not real, despite the comedic value of them doing so here.
https://www.lexico.com/definition/cromulent
https://www.lexico.com/definition/embiggen