@ Retina.
Noxious & obnoxious. I expect there will be more.

PG Wodehouse
 

"I could see that, if not actually disgruntled,
he was far from being gruntled."

[quote=davieddy;198725]
As an immoderator I am bereft of the power to change it.

[/quote]

David

[QUOTE=99.94;199077]Noxious & obnoxious. I expect there will be more.[/QUOTE]I don't think "ob" is a reversing prefix. Is it? :confused:

[quote=davieddy;198726]Ellipsis[/quote]
I meant elision.

[QUOTE=retina;199064]* Think of a word. e.g. Happy.
* Add a prefix that would normally reverse the meaning of the word. e.g. [i]Un[/i]happy
* But now this new word, with the prefix, means the same as the first word.
[/QUOTE]

I suppose you could count regardless and irregardless even if it is actually just a common misuse.

I just thought of radiate and irradiate which seems to follow the same pattern.

[QUOTE=lfm;199093]I suppose you could count regardless and irregardless even if it is actually just a common misuse.[/QUOTE]Yes, why not. Words [i]are[/i] defined by their use (or misuse). There are many words (and phrases) that have changed meaning over time. Common usage always trumps "proper" use.

Maldives
 

Hilary Clinton's pronunciation of it just now was most
appropriate when interpreted as Franglais for "bad submersions"

[url]http://www.rinkworks.com/words/[/url]

[QUOTE=davieddy;199091]I meant elision.[/QUOTE]
Hence my confusion.

[QUOTE=davieddy;199082]"I could see that, if not actually disgruntled,
he was far from being gruntled."[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-rut1.htm"]Orphaned negatives[/URL]
(I am always wandering around looking for my gorm.)

[quote=retina;199087]I don't think "ob" is a reversing prefix. Is it? :confused:[/quote]From WTNID:

"[B]ob-[/B] [I]prefix[/I] ... [B]1 :[/B] inward < [I]ob[/I]imbricate > [B]2 :[/B] incompletely < [I]ob[/I]rotund > < [I]ob[/I]round > [B]3 :[/B] in reverse order < [I]ob[/I]diplostemonous > [B]4 :[/B] inverse < [I]ob[/I]ovate > < [I]ob[/I]conic > < [I]ob[/I]cordate >"