Being Stubborn

Question

Is the word lossed ever used?

I know the past participle of lose is lost, but I just can't help thinking that lossed is a word. Have I just been pronoucing the word wrong all these years, or perhaps I can blame it on one too many Agatha Christie mysteries.
Thanks

Whl626 · Accepted Answer

I myself haven't come across it before.

lose lost lost

loss = ( noun )

Rommie · Answer

I shall let you into a great secret. There is a special power you can use to discover whether or not a given sequence of letters constitutes a word. It is a secret known only to the high priests of grammar and vocabulary, and has been passed down from generation to generation. You see, there is a great source of knowledge and wisdom, which holds the answer to this and many other questions like it. It's called ... a dictionary.

There is no such word as "lossed" according to mine.

Rommie

Mp · Answer

Yeah, I looked it up in the dictionary. But I'll let you in on a secret not all dictionaries are the same and here is an example, oh great guru of the English Language. My Merriam Webster Colliagate 10th edition lists snuck as an actual word, when most others omit it entirely, list is as slang or as regional.

My point, I could have done without your sarcasm. I don't think it is conducive to learning or communicating for that matter.

Have a nice day.

Rommie · Answer

MP, I do apologize. Guess I was having a bad day this morning.

Which verson of M-W do you have? Mine is "Merriam Webster's Unabridged Dictionary". It classifies "snuck" as chiefly dialect.

I also looked up "snuck" in M-W's online dictionary. It says:

usage From its earliest appearance in print in the late 19th century as a dialectal and probably uneducated form, the past and past participle snuck has risen to the status of standard and to approximate equality with sneaked. Indications are that it is continuing to grow in frequency. It is most common in the U.S. and Canada, but has also been spotted in British and Australian English.

I think they have some justification in claiming it to be a real word. After all, M-W is an American dictionary, and so reflects American usage. They claim that the word has been in use in their part of the world since the late 19th century. If that's true, I don't see why it shouldn't be accepted as a real word. A hundred years or more is a long time for a word to be around. "Nanotech" hasn't been around anywhere near as long, yet I accept that as a word.

You do raise an interesting point, however, in that what constitutes a word may depend on what dictionary you use. But the language is in flux. It always was, and it always will be. New words arise all the time, and old ones change their meaning. Dictionaries often try to reflect actual usage, rather than dictate what people "should" say. And that's fair enough, because of course there really is no once-and-for-all globally accepted list of "real" words.

Please forgive my sarcasm. It wasn't really aimed at you, just at an increasing trend of people (mostly anonymous guests) posting homework questions without having taken any effort themselves. I should not have included you in that category and I apologize.

Rommie

Being Stubborn

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions