"unwieldly"

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this always an
error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've run into it
lots.

When it comes to the acceptability of spelling variations, I think
your only option is to consult a dictionary. If it lists the
alternative, it's known and acceptable. If it doesn't, it isn't.
Society has gotten very casual about flouting the rules of the grammar
books, but I don't think it has yet acquired the same lackadaisical
opinions about spelling. (We just see a lot more of the bad spelling
that has always existed.)

Merriam-Webster Online has "unwieldy," period. For the adverb, it
says "unwieldily."

--
Best -- Donna Richoux

The UnInmate

2008-07-28 01:28:19 UTC

Post by Donna Richoux

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this always an
error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've run into it
lots.

When it comes to the acceptability of spelling variations, I think
your only option is to consult a dictionary. If it lists the
alternative, it's known and acceptable. If it doesn't, it isn't.
Society has gotten very casual about flouting the rules of the grammar
books, but I don't think it has yet acquired the same lackadaisical
opinions about spelling. (We just see a lot more of the bad spelling
that has always existed.)
Merriam-Webster Online has "unwieldy," period. For the adverb, it
says "unwieldily."

I checked with dictionary.com and it lists "unwieldly" as an alternative to
"unwieldy." There are also 94,000 hits on google for "unwieldly" and
2,540,000 for "unwieldy." The evidence seems to suggest that, in terms of
usage, "unwieldly" is generally accepted as an alternative, but I didn't say
that in my OP because I wanted people's uninfluenced opinions.

unknown

2008-07-28 01:20:48 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this always an
error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've run into it
lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

Skitt

2008-07-28 01:28:55 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this
always an error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said
I've run into it lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

People differ on that last one, and it has been discussed in this forum at
length. There is a difference between doing alright on a test (say, 85%)
and getting it all right (100%).

--
Skitt (AmE)
http://www.geocities.com/opus731/jobs.html

unknown

2008-07-28 01:56:37 UTC

Post by Skitt

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this
always an error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said
I've run into it lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

People differ on that last one, and it has been discussed in this forum
at length. There is a difference between doing alright on a test (say,
85%) and getting it all right (100%).

True, but it's a case of usage trumping meaning (alright=okay; not, as
it should, perfect=ALL right, correct). By those standards,
"irregardless" can replace "regardless" too. But that's alright, Mama,
that's alright for you, that's alright Mama, anyway you do, well that's
alright, that's alright, that's alright, Mama, anyway you do. Well Mama
she done tol' me, Papa done tol' me too. . . . Oh, Hell, most of you
know the song anyway!

Maria C.

2008-07-28 02:25:52 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this
always an error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said
I've run into it lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

People differ on that last one, and it has been discussed in this
forum at length. There is a difference between doing alright on a
test (say, 85%) and getting it all right (100%).

True, but it's a case of usage trumping meaning (alright=okay; not, as
it should, perfect=ALL right, correct).

"Usage trumping meaning": I'm not sure that's a fair statement of what
goes on. IMO, usage influences dictionary definitions and pronunciations
and perhaps spelling. Of course, it takes a while for updates to surface
in print. Online dictionaries probably get updated in a more timely
fashion.

Post by unknown
........By those standards,
"irregardless" can replace "regardless" too.

Replace? Or be added as a variant? I think the latter.

[snip song lyrics]

--
Maria C.

R H Draney

2008-07-28 04:20:28 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this
always an error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said
I've run into it lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

People differ on that last one, and it has been discussed in this
forum at length. There is a difference between doing alright on a
test (say, 85%) and getting it all right (100%).

True, but it's a case of usage trumping meaning (alright=okay; not, as
it should, perfect=ALL right, correct).

The language has embraced the difference between "already" and "all ready", and
the difference between "altogether" and "all together"...just give it time....

Post by Maria C.
"Usage trumping meaning": I'm not sure that's a fair statement of what
goes on. IMO, usage influences dictionary definitions and pronunciations
and perhaps spelling. Of course, it takes a while for updates to surface
in print. Online dictionaries probably get updated in a more timely
fashion.

Post by unknown
........By those standards,
"irregardless" can replace "regardless" too.

Replace? Or be added as a variant? I think the latter.

I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.

Maria C.

2008-07-28 21:59:33 UTC

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

--
Maria C.

Jitze

2008-07-29 07:54:18 UTC

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.

If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Jitze

R H Draney

2008-07-29 15:55:43 UTC

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.

Richard Bollard

2008-07-30 05:46:09 UTC

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

ObMarvin:

'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia

To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.

Chuck Riggs

2008-07-30 13:46:06 UTC

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

--
Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

LaReina del Perros

2008-07-31 00:50:01 UTC

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by Richard Bollard
'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

It's Marvin the Paranoid Android in Douglas Adams's _Life, the
Universe, and Everything_.

Did that help?

R H Draney

2008-07-31 06:58:16 UTC

Post by LaReina del Perros

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by Richard Bollard
'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

It's Marvin the Paranoid Android in Douglas Adams's _Life, the
Universe, and Everything_.
Did that help?

Help...don't talk to me about help....r

--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.

Richard Bollard

2008-07-31 05:03:14 UTC

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

Marvin the Paranoid Android, from the Hitchhikers "trilogy" by Douglas
Adams.

--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia

To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.

Chuck Riggs

2008-07-31 14:52:37 UTC

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:03:14 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

Marvin the Paranoid Android, from the Hitchhikers "trilogy" by Douglas
Adams.

Ages ago, I read an enjoyable piece of fluff called "The Hitchhiker's
Guide to the Universe", but I haven't read the Marvin book. I don't
remember the third title of the trilogy, but I think I read it. It
seems to me there was also a Douglas Adams' computer game designed for
an early computer I owned, but my memories of both it and the computer
are fuzzy.

--
Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

Paul Wolff

2008-07-31 19:12:22 UTC

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:03:14 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

Marvin the Paranoid Android, from the Hitchhikers "trilogy" by Douglas
Adams.

There was, and I'd dearly like a copy to run on a PC. Mine was an
edition for the Apricot, not compatible with the AT/XT systems, and I
have it no more. Although I reached the endpoint of the game, I am
pretty certain I missed some amusing by-ways. It can still be played
online.

Is this something like what you remember?
http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/infocomjava.html

--
Paul

R H Draney

2008-07-31 20:13:31 UTC

Post by Chuck Riggs
Ages ago, I read an enjoyable piece of fluff called "The Hitchhiker's
Guide to the Universe", but I haven't read the Marvin book. I don't
remember the third title of the trilogy, but I think I read it. It
seems to me there was also a Douglas Adams' computer game designed for
an early computer I owned, but my memories of both it and the computer
are fuzzy.

There was, and I'd dearly like a copy to run on a PC. Mine was an
edition for the Apricot, not compatible with the AT/XT systems, and I
have it no more. Although I reached the endpoint of the game, I am
pretty certain I missed some amusing by-ways. It can still be played
online.
Is this something like what you remember?
http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/infocomjava.html

Odd...I assumed Chuck was referring to the game "Starship Titanic" in which
Adams appears briefly as a character...I *do* have that one for the PC but was
never able to finish it; according to the walkthroughs I should have had
everything I needed to wrest the perch away from the parrot but the maneuver
wouldn't work for me....

To help Chuck further with the original question, the "Marvin" character didn't
have a book of his own, but appeared throughout all five-plus-a-fraction books
of the "trilogy"....r

--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.

Paul Wolff

2008-07-31 21:55:26 UTC

There was, and I'd dearly like a copy to run on a PC. Mine was an
edition for the Apricot, not compatible with the AT/XT systems, and I
have it no more. Although I reached the endpoint of the game, I am
pretty certain I missed some amusing by-ways. It can still be played
online.
Is this something like what you remember?
http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/infocomjava.html

Odd...I assumed Chuck was referring to the game "Starship Titanic" in which
Adams appears briefly as a character...I *do* have that one for the PC but was
never able to finish it; according to the walkthroughs I should have had
everything I needed to wrest the perch away from the parrot but the maneuver
wouldn't work for me....
To help Chuck further with the original question, the "Marvin" character didn't
have a book of his own, but appeared throughout all five-plus-a-fraction books
of the "trilogy"....r

Chuck's "early" precludes the Starship Titanic. That wasn't designed
for any early computer. And I too have an unresolved dispute with the
parrot.

--
Paul

Chuck Riggs

2008-08-01 13:56:32 UTC

There was, and I'd dearly like a copy to run on a PC. Mine was an
edition for the Apricot, not compatible with the AT/XT systems, and I
have it no more. Although I reached the endpoint of the game, I am
pretty certain I missed some amusing by-ways. It can still be played
online.
Is this something like what you remember?
http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/infocomjava.html

No, I never played that one.

Post by R H Draney
To help Chuck further with the original question, the "Marvin" character didn't
have a book of his own, but appeared throughout all five-plus-a-fraction books
of the "trilogy"....r

Now I've forgotten my Marvin question, but thank you.

--
Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

Chuck Riggs

2008-08-01 13:54:18 UTC

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:12:22 +0100, Paul Wolff

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:03:14 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by Chuck Riggs
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:09 +1000, Richard Bollard

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

'That young girl is one of the least benightedly
unintelligent organic life forms it has been my profound
lack of pleasure not to be able to avoid meeting.'

Would it help to know who Marvin is?

Marvin the Paranoid Android, from the Hitchhikers "trilogy" by Douglas
Adams.

There was, and I'd dearly like a copy to run on a PC. Mine was an
edition for the Apricot, not compatible with the AT/XT systems, and I
have it no more. Although I reached the endpoint of the game, I am
pretty certain I missed some amusing by-ways. It can still be played
online.
Is this something like what you remember?
http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/infocomjava.html

It is similar in that it is a text adventure that relates to the book,
but from the computerese in the first few lines of the above, I can
see it postdates the text adventure I played by several years.
"Zork I, II, and III" were very popular text adventures of the same
era, if you remember those. All these predate VGA and even EGA
monitors. After the VGA's introduction, computer adventure gaming
really took off.

--
Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

Mark Brader

2008-08-01 05:24:56 UTC

Post by Richard Bollard
Marvin the Paranoid Android, from the Hitchhikers "trilogy" by Douglas
Adams.

You mean "Marvin the 'Paranoid' Android, from the Hitchhikers 'trilogy'...".

--
Mark Brader | scanf() is even more complicated and usually does
Toronto | something almost but not completely unlike what
***@vex.net | you want. -- Chris Torek (after Douglas Adams)

Chuck Riggs

2008-07-30 13:43:50 UTC

Post by R H Draney
I like to think of "irregardless" as meaning "without irregard"....r

Perfect. So sensible. Dictionary material if I ever saw it.

While you're at it, please fix the entries for flammable and
inflammable.
If a double negative can be used for emphasis, then a triple
negative has to be even better - disirregardless of Mrs
Thistlebotham's sentiments on the matter

Never let it be denied that I couldn't help but fail to disagree with you
less....r

If I remembered how, I'd ask de Morgan to come to my rescue while
interpreting that one, Ron.

--
Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

Purl Gurl

2008-07-28 02:32:57 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this
always an error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said
I've run into it lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

"alright" is a correct spelling.

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Robert Lieblich

2008-07-28 03:38:34 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this always an
error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've run into it
lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

Am I the only person here who looks things up in the FAQ? Voila:

http://www.alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxalrigh.html

Some of our British participants have reported careful observation in
the UK of the different spelloings and usages of "alright" and "all
right." Skitt, for one, has pointed out the distinction on this very
thread. I (American) have taken to using "alright" in casual writing
when I mean what it conveys, Miss Thistlebottom be damned.

--
Bob Lieblich
'Sawright?

tony cooper

2008-07-28 04:16:19 UTC

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:38:34 -0400, Robert Lieblich

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this always an
error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've run into it
lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

http://www.alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxalrigh.html
Some of our British participants have reported careful observation in
the UK of the different spelloings and usages of "alright" and "all
right." Skitt, for one, has pointed out the distinction on this very
thread. I (American) have taken to using "alright" in casual writing
when I mean what it conveys, Miss Thistlebottom be damned.

S'OK.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

LaReina del Perros

2008-07-29 05:03:20 UTC

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:16:19 -0400, tony cooper

Post by tony cooper
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:38:34 -0400, Robert Lieblich

Post by Robert Lieblich
Some of our British participants have reported careful observation in
the UK of the different spelloings and usages of "alright" and "all
right." Skitt, for one, has pointed out the distinction on this very
thread. I (American) have taken to using "alright" in casual writing
when I mean what it conveys, Miss Thistlebottom be damned.

S'OK.

You win.

Django Cat

2008-07-28 06:39:16 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this

always an > error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've
run into it > lots.
It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

Am I the only person here who looks things up in the FAQ?

Yes.

--

Chuck Riggs

2008-07-28 13:13:36 UTC

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 06:39:16 GMT, "Django Cat"

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this

always an > error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've
run into it > lots.
It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

Am I the only person here who looks things up in the FAQ?

Yes.

Being humans, and therefore quite lazy, my bet is few of us do, but I
find myself reviewing the FAQ from time to time. That is substantially
easier, I think, than looking up individual words and phrases.

--
Regards,

Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland

Robert Lieblich

2008-07-28 22:56:55 UTC

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this

always an > error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've
run into it > lots.
It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

Am I the only person here who looks things up in the FAQ?

Yes.

Why am I not surprised?

John O'Flaherty

2008-07-29 05:02:54 UTC

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:38:34 -0400, Robert Lieblich

Post by The UnInmate
The word "unwieldy" is commonly misspelled as "unwieldly." Is this always an
error or a somewhat acceptable matter of usage? As I said I've run into it
lots.

It's always an error. Like "alot" for "a lot" or "alright" for "all right."

Typoings?

--
John

Robert Lieblich

2008-07-30 03:21:05 UTC

John O'Flaherty wrote:

[ ... ]

Post by John O'Flaherty

Typoings?

Owing to carelessness.

CDB

2008-07-30 19:38:50 UTC

[>> Here come the Judge:]

Post by Robert Lieblich
[ ... ]

Post by John O'Flaherty

Post by Robert Lieblich
Some of our British participants have reported careful
observation in the UK of the different spelloings and usages of
"alright" and "all right." [Alright, that'll do.]

Typoings?

Owing to carelessness.

And the smallness of his fists, as you suggested.

Prai Jei

2008-07-29 17:32:43 UTC