10 Words We Don’t Use without “In-“
Logophiles may enjoy playing with prefixes and suffixes, but we know not every word we make that way will be a real word (you know, the kind in the dictionary). In this case, however, the words are real – they’re just words we don’t use without their prefix.
Words You May Not Recognize without “In-“
When you take away the prefix, not even spellcheck recognizes some of these words. Merriam Webster, on the other hand, lists them all.
Advertent
We might’ve inadvertently used “advertent” or “advertently” at some point, but it was a spelling error. Spellcheck still thinks it’s a spelling error.
And it doesn’t mean what you think it means. Nope. It’s not “purposeful” or “intentional.” It harkens back to an older definition and actually means “heedful” or “attentive.”
Maybe that’s why it stopped getting used. There are always more inattentive folks around than attentive.
Corrigible
This is one you might recognize, but when’s the last time you heard someone or something called corrigible? Incorrigible, yeah. Some of us hear that pretty regularly.
I mean, lots of people are willing to say there’s no hope for you. Granted, “incorrigible” is most often used humorously. Even so, few people are gonna call you “fixable” or “correctable.” Joking or not.
Capacitate
Throw this at a doctor the next time you see one. “Congratulations! You capacitated him!”
He might get confused. Apparently, although that’s the obvious definition, it’s archaic, and the modern one is a more technical term a doctor might recognize (a very specific part of reproduction).
In this case, I can definitely see why the “to make capable” definition faded out. After all, how often does that happen? It’s a lot easier to incapacitate someone than to capacitate someone that’s for sure!
Destructible
I feel like I should start using this around toddlers. “Are you sure it’s ok to let him loose in here? That looks destructible…”
It works with cats, too, now that I think of it.
In contrast to the last one, this word could describe just about anything. Really, what isn’t capable of being destroyed?
Maybe, this one fell out of use because it was too redundant. “Why bother saying it? Go find something indestructible. Then, talk to me.”
Dividual
What does that even mean? Well, if you really want to know, you better use an unabridged dictionary. All 3 of this one’s definitions are labeled “archaic.”
- Separate or distinct
- Divisible or divided
- Distributed or shared (AKA divided among many)
So by adding “not,” the meaning becomes
- unique,
- a person, or
- relating to one person rather than a group.
Yeah, that makes sense, English. 🙄
Domitable
“Tamable.” Uh-huh.
This has the same problem as “corrigible.” Who or what are you going to call “tamable”? Seriously, just try to picture using it where you’d normally use “indomitable”:
“He had a domitable will.” *snicker*
I don’t think so. I can’t remember ever using “tamable” except in the negative. Let alone “domitable.”
Dubitable
Well,… it’s kind of fun to say. That said, when I’m calling something into question or doubting it, I try to use fewer syllables. I guess this’d be good if I really wanted to sound pompous.
Now, I’m imagining the baby elephant in Tarzan: “It looks dubitable to me!”
Ordinate
The first known use is apparently 1706, and I can see why it didn’t gain popularity. What I don’t see is how “ordinate” can mean “the Cartesian coordinate obtained by measuring parallel to the y-axis” while “inordinate” means “exceeding reasonable limits” or “disorderly.”
They got their money’s worth with that prefix! Although it definitely didn’t work as advertised. Apparently, “not” is far more nuanced than I thought.
Scrutable
This is another good word for being pompous and pretentious. Throw it in the next time you want to talk about something being clear or understandable.
“I don’t see what the problem is. The situation seems quite scrutable.”
Just don’t expect to make friends when you do that. And don’t be surprised to hear, “Scrutable? Is that even a word?”
Vincible
A crowd of people screams and scatters as an explosion rocks the ground and sends avalanches of broken building showering down at them. Floating out of the chaos, a heavily muscled man in a tight costume and cape, raises his fists and loudly proclaims, “I am vincible!!!”
Across the plaza, a masked hero pauses, “Doesn’t he mean-“
“-Shhhh,” his companion said, lifting her weapon, “One of them finally got it right.”
I like that a little too much. But that pretty much tapped me out as far as using the word. I don’t know about you, but I don’t really see myself calling anyone “vincible” in real life.
Or in a story for that matter. Ten bucks says the reader would think it was a typo!
Would You Use Them?
Whaddya think? Are you gonna start throwing “dubitable” and “advertent” around? Or do we leave these as nerdy trivia in our brains (AKA words we don’t use) and stick with their more popular counterparts?
