Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2014 April 15

= April 15 =

wondtacular
Wondtacular is a word I came across but failed to find in any dictionary. I suspect it is an adjective, a blend of wonderful and spectacular. Am I right? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.202.187.153 (talk) 03:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Haven't seen that one before, but I'm sure a ginormous number of Portmanteaus have been coined over the years. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It doesn't exactly flow off the lips, so it fails the test of being spectacular. In other words, if searching for a new word to coin, it's a rather benign choice, but it's not a testacular answer.  StuRat (talk) 05:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It seems fairly cromulent to me. RomanSpa (talk) 05:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It doesn't surprise me that it's failed to catch on, since it sounds rather awkward... AnonMoos (talk) 02:58, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Someone has added the word to Urban Dictionary (where anyone can add anything they've just made up), and it appears on Youtube, but that's not enough to justify an entry in Wiktionary. If it catches on and gets used in print, it will gain dictionary status, meanwhile, it is just a protologism.    D b f i r s   06:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It's too wonkytitious for my taste. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:02, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It violates expected English phonology. There's no native -dt- sequence in English. μηδείς (talk) 22:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * It also has an unfortunate garden-path quality, in that unless you know the intended meaning, it's natural to try pronouncing the first syllable like 'wand' rather than like 'wund'. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)