Not too shabby...
Apr. 12th, 2003 09:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
*preens*
197/200 isn't too bad, although I'll admit to having made a few educated guesses on some words. :)
So far I think Kay is up at the top with 199. Wonder if anyone else could score higher?
forthright, I'm looking at you when you have the desire to procrastinate a bit. It takes about ten or fifteen minutes, tops.
197/200 isn't too bad, although I'll admit to having made a few educated guesses on some words. :)
So far I think Kay is up at the top with 199. Wonder if anyone else could score higher?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
no subject
Date: 2003-04-12 06:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-04-12 06:24 pm (UTC)Well done, Phnee!
Re:
Date: 2003-04-12 06:35 pm (UTC)Like I said in my other comment, though, it hardly means that I (or you) am intelligent. Granted, we are, but this isn't the proof. ;)
It just means we're good at remembering words and the spelling thereof.
Re:
Date: 2003-04-12 06:34 pm (UTC)Every now and then I take these things to prove to myself that my brain hasn't atrophied, but I shouldn't take them, really.
I mean, what does it prove except that I happen to know the same words as the person who wrote the test?
It's the same as those IQ tests. Depending on the type of question, I sometimes score very low, even though I know I must be of at least average intelligence.
For instance: Mike is to Iron as Cal is to (blank).
I'm supposed to answer "silent," because *any* idiot knows that they're talking about "Iron" Mike Tyson and "Silent" Calvin Coolidge. *rolls eyes*
Hello?!? Sorry, but I don't follow American sports, and "Cal" means nothing to me out of context.
Anyway, rant over. ;)
no subject
Date: 2003-04-12 06:33 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2003-04-12 06:38 pm (UTC)I had fun making some of the guesses: usually when I had to guess it was because I knew one word and not the other, and so tried to work out what the unknown word was by delving waaaaaay back in the depths of my mind to my Latin days and the smattering of Ancient Greek I managed to pick up on my own.
Going to stop rambling now. ;)
Ew.
:D
Re: Ew.
Date: 2003-04-13 10:18 am (UTC)Frankly, that list looks like someone cracked open a thesaurus randomly and picked out the "hardest" words they could find. ;)
Re: Ew.
Date: 2003-04-13 09:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Re: Not too shabby...
Date: 2003-04-13 03:15 am (UTC)swagger and panache are very different.
The first is done by someone macho and drunk
The second is done by someone debonaire.
I still don't know what trefa means.
Many times their words are similarities rather than the same. Sometimes there is not even that close of a relation:
supine is just relaxed and laying on your back while lethargic means lacking in energy. You might be supine because you were lethargic but that's different.
agrypnia is a religious all night vigil before a great feast. To call that the same as insomnia is like saying that going to mass is the same as going to a grocery store. After all, in both cases you go into a building.
To decamp is to leave quietly and secretly. Said of those leaving a battle at night as to not face their enemy in the morning. vamoose is similar to skedaddle. It's to leave someplace quickly without regard to secrecy or noise.
I guessed that hybrid vigor is the same as heterosis but only because you replace forms of speech in heterosis and I was guessing that might be a hybrid. It still doesn't make sense.
There was more but I'll leave it at that.
The idea of 'thewy' or 'precocial' actually being words in their own right rather than just off the cuff formations that would only be used in speaking ex tempore sends a shudder down my spine.
Re: Not too shabby...
Date: 2003-04-13 10:14 am (UTC)"Trefa" is a deformation of "treyf" which is a Yiddish word meaning "not kosher." I think it was silly of them to include it, but then they included a huge number of French words too, so I guess they can do what they want.
Re: Not too shabby...
Date: 2003-04-15 01:49 am (UTC)Re: Not too shabby...
Date: 2003-04-15 07:02 am (UTC)