What a paradox....

All generalizations are bad. Every last one. ~grin~ cn
That, and what's a synonym for Thesaurus?
images
 
no clue...never thought about it..
Russell's paradox: Does the set of all those sets that do not contain themselves contain itself?
 
Heterologous is not the same word.
Heterological, as per Wiktionary:
"of an adjective, not describing itself."
"Abbreviated" is heterological, since the word is not short. cn
 
The antonym of "heterologous" is "homologous".
Thew antonym of "heterological" is "autological". A synonym for "autological" is "self-referent". "Polysyllabic" is autological because the word conforms to its own definition. "Monosyllabic" is heterological, since the word itself is polysyllabic.

Noun forms:
heterological => heterologism
heterologous => heterology

Some online dictionaries conflate the two, but I see value in reserving "heterological" as a lexigographic term. Otherwise we end up with a disaster like the annexation by the popular press of "gender". Strictly speaking, only words have genders. Living things have sexes. Thus spake the Bear. cn
 
Unstoppable and immovable are terms of infinite. Humans can't understand it. In terms we do understand, I believe it would go thru the immovable object instead of moving it.

if an immovable object cant be moved and an unstoppable object cant be stopped; it is an unanswerable question with no logical answer. Even a questionless answer O.o
 
yes i did. We are both on the same page, i disagree about breakage is all as it is unmovable not just immobile. So i put my view on it. opinions are great, esspecially in conversations. <.<
 
Back
Top