Posted: June 24, 2010, 01:46:02 PM
The problem is, Tao, that you just took nearly 200 words to explain what your neologism means. That severely limits its ability to catch on, because it's not intuitively obvious. A neologism has to be more than clever, it has to be useful, and the ones that catch on are the ones where you go "Oh, of course, I NEED that word" without having to spend a lot of time thinking about its origins.
(I like Dan's "back-splice" suggestion, because it does suggest precisely what it means, in the context it would be used).
As to Dan's comment about people putting words together to make new words....well, English is a Germanic language (if only because "mutt" isn't recognized as a linguistic category), and that's a hallmark of the German language. Makes sense that we'd do similar things with our own words.
(I like Dan's "back-splice" suggestion, because it does suggest precisely what it means, in the context it would be used).
As to Dan's comment about people putting words together to make new words....well, English is a Germanic language (if only because "mutt" isn't recognized as a linguistic category), and that's a hallmark of the German language. Makes sense that we'd do similar things with our own words.