PsyCho Posted October 31, 2006 Report Share Posted October 31, 2006 Okay, I've been playing this for about a year with anyone who cares to give it a go. You've all heard of the word association game, well this is the inverse; It is slightly trickier, can be a wee bit less freudian, and has interesting liguistic consequences. Basic rules (one way) 1) Word 1 has to be followed by word 2 (there's a few moot circumstances were you can have word 1->2 disassociation but can argue association between 2->1.. Later game) 2) Word 1 can not be related to word 2 in:- Form e.g cat to hat.. Not allowed (on 2 counts).. Or Haven and raven, top to pot etc., tie to tip... Far too easy to see the jump- Usage e.g Fork to pie.. Clear association- Subject E.g. Taco to pate- Abstract e.g. Chicken to road, stitch to nine, integer to real etc., In fact the further you can disassociate from the original word, the better. There are some elegant jumps and knights move logic one can pull - So favours you manics out there.:shrug: Also those with a frankly filthy mind also appear to have a natural flair for this game :) If someone can associate the link (without too many objections or leaps of faith), then another jump has to be found. There are about 3 dead end words I have found; this is an attempt to locate more of them Oh 3) It has to be "a word", singular, an entity in it's own right floating in the linguistic soup of language. Clear as mud, well lets begin with a gentle start: BADGER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted October 31, 2006 Report Share Posted October 31, 2006 objection Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted October 31, 2006 Report Share Posted October 31, 2006 1) merkin2) printer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted October 31, 2006 Report Share Posted October 31, 2006 objectionAffirmation......................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsyCho Posted November 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2006 Pedantic objection Objection to affirmation Both in same descriptive subject, very easy to see your association there Surely you can jump better than that :shrug: (and so the gauntlet is laid) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted November 1, 2006 Report Share Posted November 1, 2006 Also those with a frankly filthy mind also appear to have a natural flair for this game :shrug: Evidently, my mind is not filthy enough for your game, ha, haaaaaaa..........................Infy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsyCho Posted November 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2006 You say that like a filthy mind is not something to be proud of? :shrug: Certainly leads to an amusing day ... Infy???? (however printer to affirmation is allowed... and I like merkin) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moo Posted November 1, 2006 Report Share Posted November 1, 2006 Hmmm... I'll give it a try. :) affirmation != fire New word: flea Is this correct? And is the general idea to point out how someone's word is associated (if it is)? moo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsyCho Posted November 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Flea to -> Tesseract (The aim is to try and be as obscure as possible; the aim is to have no link, and nice words of course) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 shoval Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moo Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 (The aim is to try and be as obscure as possible; the aim is to have no link, and nice words of course)Ok, so I take it a "new word" isn't required then (sorry, the post with two words threw me). So you want disassociation and obscure words. And I assume since "shoval" was used, any language is allowed. I'll try this again... shoval to -> kaffeeklatsch moo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmarinas86 Posted November 5, 2006 Report Share Posted November 5, 2006 Ok, so I take it a "new word" isn't required then (sorry, the post with two words threw me). So you want disassociation and obscure words. And I assume since "shoval" was used, any language is allowed. I'll try this again... shoval to -> kaffeeklatsch moo nefarious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted November 5, 2006 Report Share Posted November 5, 2006 Monocle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted November 5, 2006 Report Share Posted November 5, 2006 jelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Stripe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Myrrhy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Sequel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.