Find a word OT has used only once.

[Kaitzilla]

Caught my eye and here I am drifting off topic...

c_l_o_i_s_t_e_r_i_n_g
g_r_i_s_a_i_l_l_e
n_u_r_d_l_e
s_o_l_i_t_a_i_r_e_s
t_w_i_z_z_l_e_s
z_u_c_c_h_e_t_t_o


External quote:

a_n_t_i_c_o_n_v_u_l_s_a_n_t
a_n_t_i_c_o_n_v_u_l_s_a_n_t_s
e_l_e_c_t_r_o_p_l_a_t_e_d
p_a_r_v_o
s_a_m_o_v_a_r_s

Quoted with one original use:

c_o_r_r_e_l_a_t_i_v_e_s
d_e_l_e_t_e_r_i_o_u_s_l_y
e_t_i_o_l_a_t_e_d
m_y_t_h_o_m_a_n_i_a
t_w_i_z_z_l_e

Stripped from an image (by search function):

p_a_l_i_n_k_a

Wow, I think you won.

I'm really surprised P_A_R_V_O showed up.
Forumers must have great luck with puppies.

D_E_L_E_T_E_R_I_O_U_S_L_Y might be ok if the poster quoted themselves

 

[Hygro]

is there a way to break up the words more readably that with underscores through all of it?

 

[Kaitzilla]

is there a way to break up the words more readably that with underscores through all of it?

Maybe periods?
P.a.r.v.o

Yup, that worked.

 

[Kaitzilla]

R.e.c.r.u.d.e.s.c.e.n.c.e

I'm up to five now.

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

C.h.r.o.m.a.t.i.c.a.l.l.y
C.h.r.o.n.o.t.y.p.e
D.e.m.a.t.e.r.i.a.l.i.z.e
H.e.g.e.m.o.n.i.c.a.l.l.y
M.e.s.e.n.t.e.r.y
M.i.m.e.o.g.r.a.p.h.s
P.r.i.g.g.i.s.h.l.y

External:

C.a.t.f.i.s.t.i.n.g --> as in the fishing term related to noodling...
G.r.a.v.e.l.i.n.g
V.i.s.c.o.e.l.a.s.t.i.c

Quote:

D.e.m.a.t.e.r.i.a.l.i.z.e.s

Wow, I think you won.

I'm really surprised P_A_R_V_O showed up.
Forumers must have great luck with puppies.

D_E_L_E_T_E_R_I_O_U_S_L_Y might be ok if the poster quoted themselves

Thanks! It is oddly amusing to find the singletons either due to the individual members who introduced them or the words' adjacency to more common terms.

I am also surprised by the low frequency of P.a.r.v.o and, as it turns out, the term P.a.r.v.o.v.i.r.u.s also appears to have a single original use, though with re-quoting. One of my siblings lost a year-old kitten to the virus recently, so it has been on my mind. Only one week out of the shelter. Hopefully others here have not had the same loss.

Not that there is a personal connection with all these terms. After all, no one in the family has donned the Z.u.c.h.e.t.t.o.

It would also seem likely for a number of members to be taking A.n.t.i.c.o.n.v.u.l.s.a.n.t.s for one condition or another. But the singletons only tell part of the story.

This would seem to bring me up to 13 standard words with another eight from external quotes, seven that have been quoted internally, and one from an image.

 

[Hygro]

Saxo are you running some kind of script?

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

No. It is something of an interstitial curiosity for me. Intuition, educated guesses, a few words I just stumble on.

I.n.t.e.r.s.t.i.t.i.a.l.l.y (intuition)
T.r.a.n.s.i.t.o.r.i.l.y (educated guess)

It would be interesting to see perhaps the 500 most frequently used words in the forum minus the 100-500? most frequently used words in the English language.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Saxo are you running some kind of script?

We are competing against a (new) forumer whose namesake looks like God reading a book.
Saxo Grammaticus - Wikipedia

Of course we are outgunned!

C.h.r.o.m.a.t.i.c.a.l.l.y
C.h.r.o.n.o.t.y.p.e
D.e.m.a.t.e.r.i.a.l.i.z.e
H.e.g.e.m.o.n.i.c.a.l.l.y
M.e.s.e.n.t.e.r.y
M.i.m.e.o.g.r.a.p.h.s
P.r.i.g.g.i.s.h.l.y

External:

C.a.t.f.i.s.t.i.n.g --> as in the fishing term related to noodling...
G.r.a.v.e.l.i.n.g
V.i.s.c.o.e.l.a.s.t.i.c

Quote:

D.e.m.a.t.e.r.i.a.l.i.z.e.s

Haha, outstanding.
I bolded what I thought would be common words around here.
I'm sure I saw spaghettification a few times over the years.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Ahh, my favorite word to read is actually a one-shot in the Off-Topic Forums.

S.U.S.U.R.R.A.T.I.O.N. - whispering, murmuring, or rustling: "the s.u.s.u.r.r.a.t.i.o.n. of the river"

Crowds do it too:
-the indistinct sound of people whispering

 

[Gori the Grey]

I'm the only poster who has ever used "serio-comic," but I've used it three times. Well, now four.

t.r.a.g.i.c.o.m.i.c.a.l.l.y was used once but then that post was quoted. I don't know how we're handling that (might be one of the forms Saxo has mentioned)

 

[Hygro]

I found one!
o.l.i.g.o.c.r.a.c.y

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

c_l_o_i_s_t_e_r_i_n_g
g_r_i_s_a_i_l_l_e
n_u_r_d_l_e
s_o_l_i_t_a_i_r_e_s
t_w_i_z_z_l_e_s
z_u_c_c_h_e_t_t_o


External quote:

a_n_t_i_c_o_n_v_u_l_s_a_n_t
a_n_t_i_c_o_n_v_u_l_s_a_n_t_s
e_l_e_c_t_r_o_p_l_a_t_e_d
p_a_r_v_o
s_a_m_o_v_a_r_s

Quoted with one original use:

c_o_r_r_e_l_a_t_i_v_e_s
d_e_l_e_t_e_r_i_o_u_s_l_y
e_t_i_o_l_a_t_e_d
m_y_t_h_o_m_a_n_i_a
t_w_i_z_z_l_e

Stripped from an image (by search function):

p_a_l_i_n_k_a

Some retractions made above. Although t.w.i.z.z.l.e is a valid word (both singular and plural) the validity of those particular incidences I question upon revisiting. Perhaps it is one of a series of thoughts on the nature of words under consideration that we can parse.

The post for T.w.i.z.z.l.e would seem to be a nickname for the musical artist T. Swift. That for t.w.i.z.z.l.e.s appears to be a typo for the licorice brand. Both require some interpretation that makes me wonder what exactly the singleton is that was originally posted...

As for p.a.l.i.n.k.a, turns out it was the file name of the image, which I suspect this falls outside any scope of discussion here.

Now, for a further question, I present n.a.c.r.e, which has only appeared twice, once in English and once in French. Am I misguided in sensing there are actually two words here despite their sharing a common meaning and spelling? If words from other languages are to be under consideration, there are probably many more singletons to be found.

I'm the only poster who has ever used "serio-comic," but I've used it three times. Well, now four.

t.r.a.g.i.c.o.m.i.c.a.l.l.y was used once but then that post was quoted. I don't know how we're handling that (might be one of the forms Saxo has mentioned)

To your second point, first: I feel more strongly about including the category of re-quoted posts, as it indicates a sole original use whatever the relevance others found in it. The downside is that a search yielding multiple results (due to quotes) would run contrary to the spirit of Googlewhacking that served as an inspiration.

I am more conflicted over the "external quote" where there is no clear indication the original poster had any hand in the particular word aside from introducing the text as a whole. On the other hand, I am partial to the idea that external quotes often expand the t.e.x.t.u.a.l.i.t.y of the forum.

As for the first point, I am sure it will not come as a surprise to you that at least anecdotally my searches show a number of terms are the domain of a single member or only a few members.

 

[Hygro]

hey if you retract them for not being real words I lose my only score on the board

 

[thetrooper]

Ha! Stupid Norwegian guy found one;

c-l-a-q-u-e-u-r-s

It's mine though. Is that cheating?

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

hey if you retract them for not being real words I lose my only score on the board

While I would hardly wish to exclude your contribution, in this case, I believe a quick search shows Wiki references and some recognizable publications have used it, so the question appears moot.

It's mine though. Is that cheating?

I do not see anything suspect about submitting one's own words, but it seems your submission is past the cutoff:

Words added after April 18th don't count (cough detumescence cough), as Kat says, and words with a second use added after April 18th do count.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

The post for T.w.i.z.z.l.e would seem to be a nickname for the musical artist T. Swift. That for t.w.i.z.z.l.e.s appears to be a typo for the licorice brand. Both require some interpretation that makes me wonder what exactly the singleton is that was originally posted...

It's also one of the standard moves in ice dancing. I'm the only person I know of in OT who's into that sport, but I don't remember using this word in any of my figure skating-related posts.

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

It's also one of the standard moves in ice dancing. I'm the only person I know of in OT who's into that sport, but I don't remember using this word in any of my figure skating-related posts.

As this was my inspiration for the search, let us be kindred spirits in the world of t.w.i.z.z.l.e.s and Midnight Blues.

 

[Kaitzilla]

I'm the only poster who has ever used "serio-comic," but I've used it three times. Well, now four.

t.r.a.g.i.c.o.m.i.c.a.l.l.y was used once but then that post was quoted. I don't know how we're handling that (might be one of the forms Saxo has mentioned)

Some retractions made above. Although t.w.i.z.z.l.e is a valid word (both singular and plural) the validity of those particular incidences I question upon revisiting. Perhaps it is one of a series of thoughts on the nature of words under consideration that we can parse.

The post for T.w.i.z.z.l.e would seem to be a nickname for the musical artist T. Swift. That for t.w.i.z.z.l.e.s appears to be a typo for the licorice brand. Both require some interpretation that makes me wonder what exactly the singleton is that was originally posted...

As for p.a.l.i.n.k.a, turns out it was the file name of the image, which I suspect this falls outside any scope of discussion here.

Now, for a further question, I present n.a.c.r.e, which has only appeared twice, once in English and once in French. Am I misguided in sensing there are actually two words here despite their sharing a common meaning and spelling? If words from other languages are to be under consideration, there are probably many more singletons to be found.



To your second point, first: I feel more strongly about including the category of re-quoted posts, as it indicates a sole original use whatever the relevance others found in it. The downside is that a search yielding multiple results (due to quotes) would run contrary to the spirit of Googlewhacking that served as an inspiration.

I am more conflicted over the "external quote" where there is no clear indication the original poster had any hand in the particular word aside from introducing the text as a whole. On the other hand, I am partial to the idea that external quotes often expand the t.e.x.t.u.a.l.i.t.y of the forum.

As for the first point, I am sure it will not come as a surprise to you that at least anecdotally my searches show a number of terms are the domain of a single member or only a few members.

Right, there is confusion about the best and most enjoyable way to play this new game.
Gori's idea to find words that appear one time was a great idea!


I would expand the rule list as follows:

1) Use the site search engine to find a word that has only appeared in a single OT post.
2) Spell your word out with spaces, periods,or post a screen shot, so as not to spoil the one-post beauty of the search results by making your post in this thread itself a second instance of the word's use.
3) It has to be a real word in the English language.
4) Words added after April 18th 2022 don't count. It is as if they don't exist.

... new rules?

5) A word shall only be counted once if the poster quotes themselves (even if they quote themselves multiple times).
If another poster quotes them, it counts as twice and is not a singleton.
If a poster uses the word in 4 separate posts, then it counts as 4 uses.
6) A word quoted from an outside source like wikipedia or a news article shall be counted.
7) A word that only appears in the name of a link such as p.a.l.i.n.k.a won't count.
8) A word that is a real word in the English language, but was misspelled or misused by the poster, shall be counted.
9) A word that is a real word in the English language but was spoken in a different language shall be counted.


Reasoning:
5) A poster who quotes themself is usually expanding on a train of thought, so it is really expanding the 1st post instead of making a 2nd post.
Being quoted by another poster introduces a new thought and use of the word, so the word should count twice.
A poster using the same word in multiple different posts is also introducing new thoughts and uses of the word. It didn't really make a singular appearance in the OT forums which we prize.
6) We mostly parrot other peoples' genius ideas around here to make ourselves seem more genius, so an offsite quote that generates a singleton should be honored.
7) Winning a singleton this way seems dirty and not fun.
8) The mighty search engine does not pass judgement on the posters. Neither should we.
9) The English language assimilates all other languages over time. Just like x.e.n.o.b.i.o.l.o.g.i.s.t. is not a real job that exists (yet), so too are foreign words a temporary phenomenon.
If it shows up one time, it should count!
If a mistake or foreign language causes more than one word usage, tough luck!

Perhaps the players can reach a consensus for maximum fun?

Ha! Stupid Norwegian guy found one;

c-l-a-q-u-e-u-r-s

It's mine though. Is that cheating?

Ya, it is past the cutoff date.
Perhaps try the singular?

 

[Catharsis]

Attempted to find another four-letter one (we had one on the previous page) and would like to submit this to the rules committee to see if it counts (try searching it for the reason I'm dubious):

l.u.n.k

 

[Kaitzilla]

Attempted to find another four-letter one (we had one on the previous page) and would like to submit this to the rules committee to see if it counts (try searching it for the reason I'm dubious):

l.u.n.k

I would say it counts.

The second usage was someone typing out syllables , so it was part of a larger word.