Is there really an opposite for the word shortcoming, particularly shortcomings. It seems that the English language has many negative words without a positive counterpart.
If the prefix or suffix is negative, such as 'dis-' or -'less', the word can be called an orphaned negative. There's a long list of them in wikipedia HERE.
What about underwhelm and overwhelm - what would it be to be whelmed? That sounds hilarious, doesn't it? What a dress she was wearing - I was whelmed by it. On the other hand, there are quite a few "whelmed" headlines on google.
How about nonchalant vs chalant - he carried himself in a most chalant way.
Even better are these pairings: irritate vs ritate and innocuous vs nocuous. One that I regularly enjoy is inert vs ert.
In Scottish English you might say feckless and feckful. That's because they both come from the Scottish word 'feck'. It can mean part, majority or value, worth. If somebody has feck then they are feckful – efficient, energetic, and powerful. Equally if they are feckless then they are lacking all those attributes and pretty useless as a result.
There are many bloggers who write about the English language. I quote this one on the topic of words without counterparts:
"I could write a story here about a macculate and peccable guy who tried to radiate a sense of ertia and eptitude by being chalant and plussed despite the fact that he was neither kempt nor couth."
Here's one of our prettiest Painted Lady houses in Grimsby Beach.
No comments:
Post a Comment