While Scaliaphilia may be a common phenomenon, I seem to be plagued by Thomasitis. I've come to despise speaking up in class...by anyone. Let the professor make her points. Apparently I'm so hooked on caffeine, that I put aside reading (one week from finals) to watch a History Channel program on coffee. Did you know it was allegedly discovered by an Ethiopian shephard whose goats went nuts after grazing on it? (Think crazed, red-eyed farm animals craving Homer's magically radioactive crop of Tomacco).
But while we're on the topic, I think the list of "new words" nominated by the Orlando Weekly to be included in next year's OED can include a few more justices. Off the top of my head
Alitistic - Lacking the mental capacity to recognize one's job duties (such as opening the door during a conference as the junior justice).
I'm not hopped up on caffeine enough to think of anything for Breyer. Brey wine? The driest of dry wines. Meh.
A deep-Breyer: something that you have a vague feeling is brilliant but aren't really interested in.
Posted by: PG at November 30, 2006 5:48 AMIrrelevantly, what do you think about the use of neologisms versus that of somewhat obscure terms? I read Neil Gaiman's joke about Cthulhu and had to refer to a dictionary four times: ichor, tatterdemalion, batrachian and eldritch (which is used twice).
Posted by: PG at December 1, 2006 1:33 AMWhat?
Posted by: Armen at December 1, 2006 2:57 AMIf you're trying to get an idea across and it's difficult to do it with everyday language, do you think it's better to use a neologism (particularly a portmanteau term) that will be easily understood but can't be looked up in a dictionary, or to use an obscure word?
Posted by: PG at December 1, 2006 1:09 PMI don't have ideas that are beyond the grasp of simple language. Wrong person to ask.
Posted by: Armen at December 1, 2006 1:31 PM