Having to look up words in a story

[Cagivagurl]

it depends on the word. Sometimes I do regret being able to read after I've read a definition: e.g "felching"

 

[Pureotica]

Hi,

A Googol is indeed 10^100

But a Googolplex is 10 to the power or a Googol - or 10^(10^100)

A Googolplexian is 10 to the power of a Googolplex - or 10^(10^(10^100))

None of these have ever been the largest number with a name.

The are pretty tiny compared to Skewe’s Number, Rayo’s Number, Graham’s Number or TREE(3).

And it’s the Field’s Medal - no Nobel Prize for math. Allegedly as Alfred’s wife had an affair with a mathematician.

Em

Thanks for the clarifications. I can't even conceptualize numbers that big, or what you would ever do with them. And then you think about infinity, and realize we couldn't ever name them all if we wanted to. I could go nuts thinking about math and physics and all the other science-y stuff that's way above my paygrade. Like when you see a star, you're looking at ancient history because the light itself took however many years to reach us. The bigness of space is almost paralyzing if I try to look at the information head on. Science is crazy shit. I'm almost glad I can't understand some of it. Genius is a sliver away from madness, and I don't envy those afflicted with it.

Language alone drives me crazy. Some cultures can discern colors that we can't because we don't have words for them, and therefore can't conceive them in our brains. We don't think of it as such, but language is a technology, and without words for abstract concepts, we wouldn't be able to think the thoughts. Civilization wouldn't exist, because we couldn't transfer knowledge across generations. The tools we use rewire our brains through neuroplasticity. Maybe the math wizards are able to think in the abstract without having to filter it through language. Maybe they actually think in math, instead of words, if that makes sense. Pure speculation on my end.

I did okay with math until I collided with trig, but the muscles have long since atrophied from disuse.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Thanks for the clarifications. I can't even conceptualize numbers that big, or what you would ever do with them. And then you think about infinity, and realize we couldn't ever name them all if we wanted to. I could go nuts thinking about math and physics and all the other science-y stuff that's way above my paygrade. Like when you see a star, you're looking at ancient history because the light itself took however many years to reach us. The bigness of space is almost paralyzing if I try to look at the information head on. Science is crazy shit. I'm almost glad I can't understand some of it. Genius is a sliver away from madness, and I don't envy those afflicted with it.

Language alone drives me crazy. Some cultures can discern colors that we can't because we don't have words for them, and therefore can't conceive them in our brains. We don't think of it as such, but language is a technology, and without words for abstract concepts, we wouldn't be able to think the thoughts. Civilization wouldn't exist, because we couldn't transfer knowledge across generations. The tools we use rewire our brains through neuroplasticity. Maybe the math wizards are able to think in the abstract without having to filter it through language. Maybe they actually think in math, instead of words, if that makes sense. Pure speculation on my end.

I did okay with math until I collided with trig, but the muscles have long since atrophied from disuse.

I’m not a math wiz. Biology was my major and my graduate subject. I was pretty good at math - but not that good. I have a friend who is doing maths (she adds the s) and is only in her second year. She loses me easily. But I know much more than the person in the street.

What you said is scary about science is what I love. The fact that we can conceive of the universe and the rules that govern it. That’s amazing. Beautiful. Inspiring.

Em

 

[MelissaBaby]

One of my readers had a conniption because I said that someone had a conniption.

 

[Duleigh]

I'm a word nerd, if someone comes up with a new word for an old idea I'm delighted. I try to collect these words and add them to my vocabulary, and my favorite weapon is right click - synonym just to find a way to cut back on repitition

 

[Bramblethorn]

Sometimes a less common word has a nuance that its more mundane counterpart doesn't. I'll use the alternative if it serves clarity, precision, or aesthetic impact.

I'm admittedly a word nerd, who thinks about language too much, and from odd angles. Sometimes I'll use words that are common to me, without realizing they're more obscure in general use. In one of of my college fiction courses I used the word poring, as in poring through an old catalog to find parts for a car the character was restoring. Several people tried to correct it to pouring, which tells me the word was unfamiliar to them. I didn't think it was obscure , and these were creative writing students, so I expected them to have sophisticated vocabularies.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were familiar with "poring through" (though I more often see "poring over") but not with its correct spelling. Outside professionally edited work, that one seems to be misspelled "pouring" about half the time.

One of my commenters told me "you wrote 'loosed' when you meant 'loosened'", which, no I did not.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Language alone drives me crazy. Some cultures can discern colors that we can't because we don't have words for them, and therefore can't conceive them in our brains. We don't think of it as such, but language is a technology, and without words for abstract concepts, we wouldn't be able to think the thoughts. Civilization wouldn't exist, because we couldn't transfer knowledge across generations. The tools we use rewire our brains through neuroplasticity. Maybe the math wizards are able to think in the abstract without having to filter it through language. Maybe they actually think in math, instead of words, if that makes sense. Pure speculation on my end.

My work involves mathematics, and the only time it feels at all verbal is when I need to explain it for others, or figure out terminology for something I'm doing so I can look it up. The rest of the time it's more like, I dunno, visualising a spinning engine or a vibrating bell.

 

[Bramblethorn]

One of my readers had a conniption because I said that someone had a conniption.

I believe conniptions are still legal up to the sixth week.

 

[ronde]

English is an incredibly rich language. Not just in the number of words, but in what all those words can mean, how they work together, and perhaps more importantly how they *sound* together.

You can do so many things with just simple words if you put them together properly. Why try so hard with big words that will just distract the reader?

The Thesaurus is not your friend when writing to entertain and inform people. Most newspapers, both printed and on-line, are written at about an 8th grade reading level. Sports articles are written with a bit simpler vocabulary. Technical articles can be written at a college level, but most news falls somewhere between 6th and 9th grade. The reason is to attract and keep as many readers as possible. I would think the same to be true of most novels and short stories.

 

[Bramblethorn]

And it’s the Field’s Medal - no Nobel Prize for math. Allegedly as Alfred’s wife had an affair with a mathematician.

Extremely allegedly, given that he never married!

 

[EmilyMiller]

Extremely allegedly, given that he never married!

My bad. I should check sources .

Em

 

[Paul_Chance]

When you get away from Lit and the varieties of self-publishing (should you ever choose to do so), one of the things your editor will advise you on is vocabulary. You'll use the vocabulary that is appropriate for your intended audience, since the purpose is to sell books or magazines or carry ad-space.

Some audiences want you to unleash your awesome vocabulary. Some audiences want you to keep it simple and widely accessible.

Here on Lit, the audiences are self-selecting. If they don't like your vocabulary, they just don't read your stuff. If they like it, they follow you and read all your back catalogue.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Mostly I write according to the vocabulary of my narrator/protagonist, or for dialogue the speaker.

Sometimes the language choice is important for style and characterisation. Josephine in Magnum Innominandum refers to a "heptatych" because she's had the benefit of an expensive and posh education, and her social status is important to the story, but also because I wrote it as HPL-adjacent pastiche and that just demands obscure vocabulary.

 

[FeralSmile]

Depends on how much I need to look up. One or two words in a story of a thousand words won't disturb my reading flow.

Posts like this one, I imagine, would make people stop reading (especially if English is not their first language).

That post is perfectly fine and untroubling, unless of course one happens to suffer from hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

yes, they do find it annoying... sometimes. the british voice can be jarring to [some] americans.

then you get cormac mccarthy [the absolute genius - RIP] who drops in some awesome words like deshabille [variations in spelling are avilabale]. mind you, CM just obliterates any and all 'rules.' i always have to re-set my brain when i read any of his magnificent body of work.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

widdershins [thank you, Leslie Thomas - another RIP].

 

[FeralSmile]

widdershins [thank you, Leslie Thomas - another RIP].

Deasil!

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Deasil!

i learned something new today! thanks.

 

[StillStunned]

When did "deshabille" and "widdershins" become difficult words? (I first came across "widdershins" in Rosemary Manning's Dragon books - I think it was Green Smoke, or perhaps Dragon's Quest. Those are definitely children's books.)

 

[geronimo_appleby]

When did "deshabille" and "widdershins" become difficult words? (I first came across "widdershins" in Rosemary Manning's Dragon books - I think it was Green Smoke, or perhaps Dragon's Quest. Those are definitely children's books.)

ir's subjective to the reader. just 'cause you know don't mean they do...

 

[ElectricBlue]

My work involves mathematics, and the only time it feels at all verbal is when I need to explain it for others, or figure out terminology for something I'm doing so I can look it up. The rest of the time it's more like, I dunno, visualising a spinning engine or a vibrating bell.

That's astonishing. Thanks for expressing that - it's a completely alien concept for my mind, but the idea of it amazes me. I know a mathematician, I must ask her if she visualizes in a similar way.

 

[ElectricBlue]

When did "deshabille" and "widdershins" become difficult words? (I first came across "widdershins" in Rosemary Manning's Dragon books - I think it was Green Smoke, or perhaps Dragon's Quest. Those are definitely children's books.)

They're not difficult words... unless you don't know what they mean!

I never worry about this. If a word's in my vocabulary, and it's the right word for the meaning I want, I'll use it. It's not my job to teach readers to read!

 

[nice90sguy]

My work involves mathematics, and the only time it feels at all verbal is when I need to explain it for others, or figure out terminology for something I'm doing so I can look it up. The rest of the time it's more like, I dunno, visualising a spinning engine or a vibrating bell.

Richard Feynman articulates that really well:

"I had a scheme, which I still use today when somebody is explaining something I'm trying to understand: I keep making up examples. For instance, the mathematician would come in with a terrific theorem, and they're all excited. As they're telling me the conditions of the theorem, I construct something which fits all the conditions. You know, you have a set (one ball) -- disjoint (two balls). Then the balls turn colors, grow haiirs, or whatever, in my head as they put more conditions on. Finally they state the theorem, which is some dumb thing about the ball which isn't true for my hairy green ball thing, so I say, "False!"

If it's true, they get all excited, and I let them go on for a while. Then I point out my counterexample.

"Oh, we forgot to tell you that it's that it's Class 2 Hausdorff homomorphic."

"Well then," I say, "it's trivial! It's trivial!" By that time I know which way it goes, even though I don't know what Hausdorff homomorphic means.

 

[onehitwanda]

My bad. I should check sources .

Em

I really wish we had a spanking emoji as a quick response. Sigh.

 

[onehitwanda]

When did "deshabille" and "widdershins" become difficult words? (I first came across "widdershins" in Rosemary Manning's Dragon books - I think it was Green Smoke, or perhaps Dragon's Quest. Those are definitely children's books.)

they're not difficult, they're simply rare in modern texts. The first is, obviously, French and the second originally German. Normal school children these days are not going to encounter these unless they have a penchant for dabbling in older fantasy works - or happen upon an author who uses them.

I first encountered widdershins in Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere, and I first encounted Neil Gaiman because of Good Omens, and I first encounted Good Omens because of Terry Pratchett, and I first encountered Pterry because the illustrated Colour of Magic somehow appeared in our school Library and I managed to get my grubby paws on it. Had I not encountered that book in that massively unlikely scenario, I'd certainly never have run across the word.