Comment on "Login" is not a verbparentComments−georgieporgie16yI suggest a new, combined form: looose. The meaning will be drawn from context. I anticipate efficiency improvements world-wide.−mahmud16yThe English language doesn't have a word with three or more repetitions of a letter. "LOOOL" and "mmmmmmuah" excepted.−jplewicke16yFrom /usr/share/dict/words on OSX, I get the following:whenceeer (probable corruption of whenceever, and hence not legit)walllessbossshipdemigoddessshipgoddessshipheadmistressshippatronessship−nollidge16yFirst one is probably a contraction missing the apostrophe: "whencee'er". But that doesn't explain why "wheree'er" doesn't show up.−baddox16yorly? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/viii−hugh316yVIII? That's not a word, it's a number.Or, more accurately, it's a representation of a number using characters which happen to be letters of the alphabet.−baddox16yJust as words are representations of ideas using characters which happen to be letters of the alphabet. This is all sarcasm, by the way.
Comments
I suggest a new, combined form: looose. The meaning will be drawn from context. I anticipate efficiency improvements world-wide.
The English language doesn't have a word with three or more repetitions of a letter. "LOOOL" and "mmmmmmuah" excepted.
From /usr/share/dict/words on OSX, I get the following:
whenceeer (probable corruption of whenceever, and hence not legit)
wallless
bossship
demigoddessship
goddessship
headmistressship
patronessship
First one is probably a contraction missing the apostrophe: "whencee'er". But that doesn't explain why "wheree'er" doesn't show up.
orly? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/viii
VIII? That's not a word, it's a number.
Or, more accurately, it's a representation of a number using characters which happen to be letters of the alphabet.
Just as words are representations of ideas using characters which happen to be letters of the alphabet. This is all sarcasm, by the way.