20 Words That Don't Exist (Or Shouldn't)
The English language is littered with words that don't exist or shouldn't be there. Some of these words were forced into existence by their popular use; with dictionary writers succumbing to the will of mass ignorance. Others are yet to make it into the dictionary for a variety of reasons.
Some of this superfluous defilement of English tradition results from the addition of unnecessary prefixes (e.g. re, mis, non, over, un) to the beginning of words that already mean what is intended. This point will be "reiterated" later with examples.
Our habit of ending every word with "ably" rather than "edly" or "ally" has also spawned a number of improper variations. Other nonexistent words spring from our unfamiliarity with the past participle of certain verbs (e.g. bring). Nevertheless, more examples are required, so here are 20 words that don't belong in the English language!
This commonly used word doesn't actually exist, though some dictionaries list it as non-standard. As regardless is already a negative, adding "ir" makes it a meaningless double negative. People who use "irregardless" are usually trying to sound more intelligent than they are.
Have you ever heard someone say they're whelmed? Not surprisingly, whelmed means to be completely overcome, inundated, or submerged. In other words, it means the same as overwhelmed. The unnecessary prefix was added in 14th Century England, presumably by irreparably brain damaged plague victims.
This is another non-standard word that has made it into some dictionaries. "Ain't" is a contraction of various sets of words into one airhead-friendly alternative (e.g. is not; am not; have not). It first appeared in 17th Century England around the time of another plague outbreak, though I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
Anyone with a background in science or computing will know what iterate means. For those who don't, it means to repeat. Therefore, it's peculiar that the word entered mainstream culture with the prefix "re". Are millions of English speakers re-repeating themselves, or is this another literal travesty? Regardless, reiterate has made it into the dictionary.
Among many other gaffs, departed President G.W. Bush once used "misunderestimated" in a public speech. It is a double negative that essentially just means estimated. Thankfully, it hasn't made it into the English language (yet).
In some desolate areas of London and the American deep south, "brung" is used as the past participle of bring. For this reason, it sometimes makes it into dictionaries as a non-standard word. Clearly, brought is the appropriate alternative.
When people say "aksed" instead of asked, they genuinely sound incapable of saying it properly. Perhaps the correct usage would trigger an uncomfortable muscle spasm or a cerebral hemorrhage. I'm going to guess they could say it properly with a little training.
8. Firstly (and secondly, thirdly, etc.)
Adding the suffix "ly" to words such as first, second and third is a correct usage. However, this addition is unnecessary because the words can provide the same meaning without the suffix. It is also a lazy and unimaginative mode of speech when initially, subsequently, and finally could be used instead.
If you're ordering an espresso coffee and you ask for an "expresso", you might get laughed at. When someone doesn't listen closely to how a word sounds, they can fill in the blanks using common words that sound similar (e.g. express).
Don't be burned by using inflammable in a sentence! It has exactly the same meaning as flammable (easily burns). As the prefix "in" often means an opposite (e.g. indecent, indescribable), fire safety experts have tried to phase inflammable out of the English language. It was actually the original spelling; having been derived from the Latin for inflame.
Nonplussed is Latin for "no more" in the context of being too confused to understand any more. In North America it has come to mean unimpressed or unfazed, though this meaning doesn't appear in most dictionaries. Neither meaning makes much sense because both require "plussed" to be a word, which it isn't.
One of the most amusing quirks of the grammar-Nazi profession is when people use "grammer" to correct the grammar of others. Few people have perfect spelling and grammar (including yours truly), but in these instances the guilty party deserves a humiliating rebuke.
When considering that "alittle" is not a word, it's not surprising that "alot" isn't either. Nevertheless, it wouldn't be a bad idea to create a compound word in this instance. When all other grammatical rules are followed, quickly spoken words are often combined (e.g. become, into, elsewhere). However, this is no excuse for using it in the present.
This is an amusing example of adding a prefix that sounds like it should be there, but which actually destroys the intended meaning. If thaw means to defrost something, does "unthaw" mean to freeze it again? It's simply not a word!
It is unclear if non-defunct can exist as a single word. The meaning isn't clear either, as some people think it means defunct (making the prefix unnecessary), while others use it to mean something that isn't defunct. Even in the latter usage, it is a double negative that could be substituted for a word such as "existing".
Don't get dumped for this!
It's easy to add the suffix "ably" to longer words. In this instance, the correct spelling is unequivocally.
17. Supposably (and undoubtably)
Supposedly and undoubtedly are the correct forms of these words. The suffix "ably" is often misused in place of "edly", driving many people decidedly nuts!
Participator is listed in most dictionaries despite there being a shorter alternative. The word participant has exactly the same meaning and is less of a tongue twister. Participator likely emerged from similar words like competitor and adjudicator.
Much like the previous entry, preventative is a longer variant of a shorter word with exactly the same meaning. Preventive is a preferable and more common form, though preventative has been gaining ground in Britain.
Whilst being an accepted word, administrate can be substituted by the shorter alternative, administer. However, in popular usage, administer has come to mean "give out", while administrate generally refers to the official business of administrators.
Other controversial words
Many other words were researched and found to be admissible. For example, orient and orientate are both acceptable. The latter is more often used in British English where orient is synonymous with east-Asia. Aluminium and aluminum are both acceptable as the British and American spellings respectively. Also recur and reoccur are both fine. The former denotes a constant repetition while the latter is for a single repeat occurrence.