Sorry, no definitions found. Check out and contribute to the discussion of this word!


Sorry, no etymologies found.


    Sorry, no example sentences found.


Log in or sign up to get involved in the conversation. It's quick and easy.

  • The art of making madeupical words by the simple removal or prefixes, e.g. ascetic --> scetic.

    December 22, 2008

  • There is a slight potential problem with this method if the result is a noun. Suppose one wishes to coin the madeupical term "norexic" to describe one's housemate Nora, who never met a snack food she didn't like, and has the embonpoint to prove it. Sentences like "Nora's a norexic" are out.

    I believe you allude to this issue in one of your other comments.

    But I like this whole new approach to generating madeupical words. So much leaner and more streamlined than those portmanteau coinages.

    Hmmm. How about necdotal evidence? Yes, I like it!

    *scurries off to add it to list*

    P.S. Welcome to Wordie!

    December 22, 2008

  • Sentences like "Nora's a norexic" are out.

    Not for me, though, as the "a"s are schwas. Quite different!

    December 22, 2008

  • "There is a slight potential problem with this method if the result is a noun." Sionnach is correct... avoid using this method to create nouns from words with a- prefixes. It may get terribly confusing.

    I'm rather touched that nobody's yet pointed out my glaring typo... if only one could edit the word after the event.

    December 22, 2008

  • I had no idea there were such rules for madeupical words. ;-)

    December 22, 2008

  • I was going to suggest this should be deprefixation, but as reesetee points out, it's a madeupical word anyway. Also, I wondered if the spelling was intentional, to form a portmanteau from deprivation + prefix.

    December 22, 2008

  • Gardyloo. This has an unmadeupical name 'aphesis'.

    December 23, 2008

  • That's a brilliant solution, rolig! Thank you.

    December 23, 2008

  • I withdraw my claim that this is equivalent to aphesis: that's just a phonetic reduction, but the present process is morphological: you treat something that isn't an affix as an affix.

    December 29, 2008

  • In rare cases you might be removing a genuine classical prefix (when an affixed word is in use and the root never has been), but it depends entirely on the word and its etymology. Otherwise, yes, it's just a bit of fun.

    December 29, 2008