digitabulist
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:11 pm
I was reading that today in 1684, the first patent was given for a thimble, (though of course, there have been thimbles before that time).
At the end of one of the articles, in what appeared to be an afterthought it read:
"People who collect thimbles are known as digitabulists."
Read more: http://www.articlesbase.com/collecting- ... z1KZfJjueT
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
I'd never heard of the word, so I Googled, and this is where my question comes in. The word appears in internet sites, for the purpose of offering a platform for buying and selling thimbles, but not in dictionaries, i.e., it does not appear in the Oxford English Dictionary or Dictionary.com.
Is this considered a lexicological faux pas?
[using words that aren't officially considered words, or do people use their 'pet' words hoping that they will become officially considered words, if enough people use them]
Just wondering
Sardith
At the end of one of the articles, in what appeared to be an afterthought it read:
"People who collect thimbles are known as digitabulists."
Read more: http://www.articlesbase.com/collecting- ... z1KZfJjueT
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
I'd never heard of the word, so I Googled, and this is where my question comes in. The word appears in internet sites, for the purpose of offering a platform for buying and selling thimbles, but not in dictionaries, i.e., it does not appear in the Oxford English Dictionary or Dictionary.com.
Is this considered a lexicological faux pas?
[using words that aren't officially considered words, or do people use their 'pet' words hoping that they will become officially considered words, if enough people use them]
Just wondering
Sardith