0
Usenet Posted 21 years ago
Usage
Disect - any such word?
According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist. According to Oxford Paperback, "disect" doesn't exist. According to OneLook, "disect" doesn't exist.
However, it was accepted on BrainTeaser (British game show) yesterday. Not by human error, as the words are verified by a computer. (The presenter also thought it was a word, but that's an aside.)
A search on Google gives 29,200 hits, and they nearly all seem to be misspellings of "dissect".
However, there is
http://www.veling.nl/anne/templars/roots dict.html
which gives "di two disect". The only resemblant word I know having anything to do with "two" is "bisect". And even if "disect" really is a rare alternative, it would seem one of the most redundant half-Greek, half-Latin words ever invented.
Does anyone here consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?
Stewart.
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
However, it was accepted on BrainTeaser (British game show) yesterday. Not by human error, as the words are verified by a computer. (The presenter also thought it was a word, but that's an aside.)
A search on Google gives 29,200 hits, and they nearly all seem to be misspellings of "dissect".
However, there is
http://www.veling.nl/anne/templars/roots dict.html
which gives "di two disect". The only resemblant word I know having anything to do with "two" is "bisect". And even if "disect" really is a rare alternative, it would seem one of the most redundant half-Greek, half-Latin words ever invented.
Does anyone here consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?
Stewart.
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Top answer
[nq:1]According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist. According to Oxford Paperback, "disect" doesn't exist. According to OneLook, "disect" doesn't exist.
- [nq:1]According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist.
- According to Oxford Paperback, "disect" doesn't exist.
- According to OneLook, "disect" doesn't exist.
- all seem to be misspellings of "dissect".
- [/nq] No.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
29 Answers
0
[nq:1]According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist. According to Oxford Paperback, "disect" doesn't exist. According to OneLook, "disect" doesn't exist. ... all seem to be misspellings of "dissect". Does anyone here consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?[/nq]
No. The show made a mistake.
Adrian
No. The show made a mistake.
Adrian
00
[nq:2]According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist. According to Oxford ... consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?[/nq]
[nq:1]No. The show made a mistake.[/nq]
As spelling mistakes go, it's quite a logical one. An "i" before two consonants is usually the "short i" of "it" insect, impact, etc. So "dissect" looks like it should begin with the "dis" of "dissatisfied".
[nq:1]No. The show made a mistake.[/nq]
As spelling mistakes go, it's quite a logical one. An "i" before two consonants is usually the "short i" of "it" insect, impact, etc. So "dissect" looks like it should begin with the "dis" of "dissatisfied".
00
Stewart Gordon wrote on 18 Jan 2005:
[nq:1]According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist. According to Oxford Paperback, "disect" doesn't exist. According to OneLook, "disect" doesn't exist. ... most redundant half-Greek, half-Latin words ever invented. Does anyone here consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?[/nq]
The OED2CDv3 does:
Obsolete: disect
trans. To cut a
[nq:1]According to Chambers 20C, "disect" doesn't exist. According to Oxford Paperback, "disect" doesn't exist. According to OneLook, "disect" doesn't exist. ... most redundant half-Greek, half-Latin words ever invented. Does anyone here consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?[/nq]
The OED2CDv3 does:
Obsolete: disect
trans. To cut a
00
[nq:1]As spelling mistakes go, it's quite a logical one. An "i" before two consonants is usually the "short i" of "it" insect, impact, etc. So "dissect" looks like it should begin with the "dis" of "dissatisfied".[/nq]
As of course it did until fairly recently, and still does for many of us.
David
As of course it did until fairly recently, and still does for many of us.
David
00
[nq:2]As spelling mistakes go, it's quite a logical one. An ... looks like it should begin with the "dis" of "dissatisfied".[/nq]
[nq:1]As of course it did until fairly recently, and still does for many of us.[/nq]
Really? You say "dis - sect"? ... I see that Merriam-Webster lists that as an "also." I never heard it. With some effort, I can imagine having heard "dis - section".
Be
[nq:1]As of course it did until fairly recently, and still does for many of us.[/nq]
Really? You say "dis - sect"? ... I see that Merriam-Webster lists that as an "also." I never heard it. With some effort, I can imagine having heard "dis - section".
Be
00
[nq:2]As of course it did until fairly recently, and still does for many of us.[/nq]
[nq:1]Really? You say "dis - sect"? ... I see that Merriam-Webster lists that as an "also." I never heard it. With some effort, I can imagine having heard "dis - section".[/nq]
Having spent many years in the medical equipment and surgical instrument business, I have to say that the "dis-sect" pronunciation
[nq:1]Really? You say "dis - sect"? ... I see that Merriam-Webster lists that as an "also." I never heard it. With some effort, I can imagine having heard "dis - section".[/nq]
Having spent many years in the medical equipment and surgical instrument business, I have to say that the "dis-sect" pronunciation
00
Hmm ... is it really likely to be the show that compiles the dictionary?
[nq:1]As spelling mistakes go, it's quite a logical one. An "i" before two consonants is usually the "short i" of "it" insect, impact, etc. So "dissect" looks like it should begin with the "dis" of "dissatisfied".[/nq]
Different sources seem to vary on the pronunciation of "dissect". But in actual use, it (nearly?) al
[nq:1]As spelling mistakes go, it's quite a logical one. An "i" before two consonants is usually the "short i" of "it" insect, impact, etc. So "dissect" looks like it should begin with the "dis" of "dissatisfied".[/nq]
Different sources seem to vary on the pronunciation of "dissect". But in actual use, it (nearly?) al
00
[nq:1]Does anyone here consider there to be really a such word as "disect"?[/nq]
OED records "disect" as an obsolete term. Only cite from 1674
John Dean
Oxford
OED records "disect" as an obsolete term. Only cite from 1674
John Dean
Oxford
00
[nq:2]Really? You say "dis - sect"? ... I see that ... some effort, I can imagine having heard "dis - section".[/nq]
[nq:1]Having spent many years in the medical equipment and surgical instrument business, I have to say that the "dis-sect" pronunciation ... a frog, but use "dis-secting" when you're talking about the instruments used in cutting apart bits and pieces of people.[/nq]
You've s
[nq:1]Having spent many years in the medical equipment and surgical instrument business, I have to say that the "dis-sect" pronunciation ... a frog, but use "dis-secting" when you're talking about the instruments used in cutting apart bits and pieces of people.[/nq]
You've s
00
[nq:1] Hmm ... is it really likely to be the show that compiles the dictionary?[/nq]
?
The show decides which words to accept. It accepted "disect". It made a mistake.
Adrian
?
The show decides which words to accept. It accepted "disect". It made a mistake.
Adrian
0
Related Questions