Lexitopia has become an Idiocracy level embarrassment

[hjkl]

I was fine until I became paranoid about the word mastax being too close to mastoid (when I get Lexitopia questions wrong it is usually cases like that) and moved off the small bone.

Technically they are wrong anyway as the mastax is not a bone at all but the muscular crushing part of a feeding tube. I'm not going to pretend I knew that, because I didn't, but had that been an option I would probably have guessed it. It certainly sounded anatomical and connected to chewing due to the Greek.

[Dante]

Originally Posted by hjkl

I was fine until I became paranoid about the word mastax being too close to mastoid (when I get Lexitopia questions wrong it is usually cases like that) and moved off the small bone.

Technically they are wrong anyway as the mastax is not a bone at all but the muscular crushing part of a feeding tube. I'm not going to pretend I knew that, because I didn't, but had that been an option I would probably have guessed it. It certainly sounded anatomical and connected to chewing due to the Greek.

I let fugacious hose me. I was just talking yesterday about a particular author's use of the word "fug" repeatedly in his book, and just immediately jumped to looking for "stale" which was my doom. Don't remember which other ones I missed, though I don't believe I got "pukka" or "blandishment." Never heard the former, and the latter I have been using incorrectly for quite a while. No excuse for being slow on redolent, but I was in pure brain fart mode there.

[RAYJ29]

Did anyone have a problem with the answer for "jocular"?
It seemed to me that #3 was the correct one, but BT said it was #4.
I forget the words, but #3 sounded like a word relating to humorous, which is the definition of jocular.
RAY J.

[MOTOR]

Originally Posted by rayj29

Did anyone have a problem with the answer for "jocular"?
It seemed to me that #3 was the correct one, but BT said it was #4.
I forget the words, but #3 sounded like a word relating to humorous, which is the definition of jocular.
RAY J.

I had a problem there too, but I just don't think of Facetious as jocular, and use it with more of a disingenuous connotation. When I looked it up, it appears to be OK.

fa⋅ce⋅tious
adjective
1.not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark.
2.amusing; humorous.
3.lacking serious intent; concerned with something nonessential, amusing, or frivolous: a facetious person.

joc⋅u⋅lar
–adjective given to, characterized by, intended for, or suited to joking or jesting; waggish; facetious: jocular remarks about opera stars.


I also chose 3. garrulous, (which I apparently also misuse, as I thought it meant talkative in a friendly, social manner.)

gar⋅ru⋅lous
–adjective 1.excessively talkative in a rambling, roundabout manner, esp. about trivial matters.2.wordy or diffuse: a garrulous and boring speech.

So, despite my best intentions, I was way off. I still won't use facetious in the same context where I would use jocular, but it seems to be acceptable to do so.

[Dante]

Originally Posted by rayj29

Did anyone have a problem with the answer for "jocular"?
It seemed to me that #3 was the correct one, but BT said it was #4.
I forget the words, but #3 sounded like a word relating to humorous, which is the definition of jocular.
RAY J.

As I said last night, colloquially, facetious does NOT mean jocular, nor is jocular used in just a "joking" manner normally. It usually, at least as I've heard it for a decade, implies a certain affability. That's why I went to garrulous. Facetious does not always imply "joking" in a "jocular" sense either.

Nevertheless, it's not technically incorrect, just didn't like both choices being there.

[bixdugan]

Jocular- I bit on garralous too. All I could think of was Radar immitating Father Mulcahey-

"Jocularity! Jocularity! Jocularity!"

I knew it meant humorous, but I didn't connect humor with facetious-ness.


Malodorous-got
Apogee-got
Caterwaul-got
Philomath-guessed
Fugacious-huh? missed
Blandishment-got
Mastax-blew it
Redolent-got
Pukka-missed. Am I the only one who thought it was kinda lame that they couldn't even use "pukka" in a sentence? Or is that sentance? I don't know...

I was being facetious!

[RAYJ29]

Originally Posted by MOTOR

I had a problem there too, but I just don't think of Facetious as jocular, and use it with more of a disingenuous connotation. When I looked it up, it appears to be OK.

fa⋅ce⋅tious
adjective
1.not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark.
2.amusing; humorous.
3.lacking serious intent; concerned with something nonessential, amusing, or frivolous: a facetious person.

joc⋅u⋅lar
–adjective given to, characterized by, intended for, or suited to joking or jesting; waggish; facetious: jocular remarks about opera stars.


I also chose 3. garrulous, (which I apparently also misuse, as I thought it meant talkative in a friendly, social manner.)

gar⋅ru⋅lous
–adjective 1.excessively talkative in a rambling, roundabout manner, esp. about trivial matters.2.wordy or diffuse: a garrulous and boring speech.

So, despite my best intentions, I was way off. I still won't use facetious in the same context where I would use jocular, but it seems to be acceptable to do so.

Wow! Thanks for the detail.
I'm impressed that you remembered garrulous & facetious.
And my Dictionary doesn't show facetious in the definition for jocular. But my Dictionary is probably 40 years old.
RAY J.

[TLEARY]

I didn't play last night, but on the evidence of the first game I played, 3 weeks ago, the answers are not always exact synonyms of the clue words (I'm remembering turgid/bombastic from back then). So, given the choice between garrulous and facetious for "jocular", I would have to say facetious wins hands down. Garrulous just means "won't shut the $@!* up"!

For "pukka" it helps to be an English national.

I think I would have nailed all except "mastax" in last night's game. Depends which meaning they offered for "fugacious" - the usual one (fleeting) or the botanical one (fading or withering quickly). If the latter, I would have had a problem.

[DMMx3]

We screwed up redolent. I think one of the choices was intense, which is at least similar to the primary definition of "odorous."

Good game though -- we enjoyed, even if we didn't do too well.

[hjkl]

Originally Posted by TLEARY

I didn't play last night, but on the evidence of the first game I played, 3 weeks ago, the answers are not always exact synonyms of the clue words (I'm remembering turgid/bombastic from back then). So, given the choice between garrulous and facetious for "jocular", I would have to say facetious wins hands down. Garrulous just means "won't shut the $@!* up"!

For "pukka" it helps to be an English national.

I think I would have nailed all except "mastax" in last night's game. Depends which meaning they offered for "fugacious" - the usual one (fleeting) or the botanical one (fading or withering quickly). If the latter, I would have had a problem.

Exactly my fate. They used the fleeting definition. Easy for Latinists.

For pukka it's not so much being an English national that helps (although I know both pf us are by birth) but having read some form of British Literature between the late 19th and mid 20th century. Dickens, Thackeray and so on up to Agatha Christie. Pretty much a stock character in that era is the crusty old and very proper "old India hand" - a retired military officer who had done service in the Raj. His characterization is almost certain to include a smattering of mostly Hindi words that made it into English, like "wallah" and "baksheesh" and, probably most common of all, "pukka". It can be used as anything from a compliment to a fine wine to a standard of behavior. The suspect in mystery novels will be described by this character as "not pukka y'know"