Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

Posted

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

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

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)

Posted

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)

Posted

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

Posted
(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

Posted
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

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...