Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Mike McBride <mcmike@netcene.com>
Newsgroups: alt.languages.english
Subject: Re: unobtainable or better
Date: 9 May 2006 20:37:02 -0500
Organization: Newscene Usenet News Service, http://www.newscene.com/
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <4qg262d75ru2qkavb0fa9r55ktpb3a2a1o@4ax.com>
References: <87ac9rjj41.fsf@gmail.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.2/32.830
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.languages.english:1204
unprocurable
On Tue, 09 May 2006 09:47:10 -0600, Burton Samograd
<kruhftREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm trying to find a name for a project I'm working on and I have some
>specific criteria that I would like to follow so I thought I might be
>able to get some help here. I'm looking for the opposite of 'owned',
>defined as 'to have something that was obtained in the past'. The word I
>would like to use should follow the definition of 'to not have the
>ability to obtain or possess (again) in the future'. A friend of mine
>thought that 'unobtainable' would be a good choice, and I found it to
>be quite good, but to multi-syliballic; I'm looking for a shorter
>word, which is also a reflection in shape and length, as well as
>meaning, so as to complete the refelective feel of the two project
>titles (ie. broken/fixed, in/out, owned/?).
>
>Any help from those with a larger vocabulary greatly appreciated;
>non-existant or made up pseudo english words also would be of great
>help.
>
>TIA.
|
|