The EVASIVE 50% word...

[RocketManJames]

My friends and I are having quite a discussion on what words are "50% words." Now, let me explain. Our universe will consist of those 18 and older and would claim English as a native language.

A 50% word is one where 50% of our population would know the definition of the word and 50% would not. For example, a 99.9% word would be "garbage." A 1% word would be something like "stentorian" (some friends disagree and have put a 0.1% rating on that word).

What do all of you think are some 50% words?

I initially thought of:

PERNICIOUS
SUPINE

Then, my friends said I was WAY WAY out of touch with reality.

Anyone want to submit their 50% words?

-RMJ

[paland]

HACKER has to be one. Most people have the wrong definition of the word. But I'm not sure this is the kind of thing you are after. This word is probably %95 recognised but only 15% will know the true definition. Also, once a word changes meaning in the general public, it usually changes officially (dictionary wise) within twenty years.

Edit: OOPS, then neither definition of this word would fit the %50 test, so it would not be a %50 word.

[RocketManJames]

How my friends and I set up our "50% test" is that 50% of the people should know the definition of at least one meaning of the word. So, if you have a word with multiple meanings, the main definition need not be known so long as another one is known.

Talking to a few others, some new suggestions as to 50% words: ASPHYXIATE and ROTUND.

I think rotund would be a 35-40% word, and asphyxiate does seem like a 50% word.

-RMJ

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
PERNICIOUS
SUPINE

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, have you MET the people?

Your examples are clearly overreaching. Pernicious? 20%, tops. Supine? Maybe 25%.

I'll give some more reasonable assertions:

Theology.
Defer.
Talisman.
Epicurian.
Satire.
Malevolent.
Languish.
Cacophony.

Actually, let's remove EPICURIAN and MALEVOLENT.

I don't know. Leave me alone.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, have you MET the people?

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently not... this is why my buddies feel that I'm out of touch with reality. Most people I deal have a stronger-than-average vocabulary, and over time you get used to this.

From your list, I'll put down what I feel are accurate percentages. This is a "new" scale for me, since I'm calibrating. I do not like to be "out of touch" with reality.

Theology. I'd give this a 60%.
Defer. This I would guess would be a 65-70%.
Talisman. I agree with this one... 50%.
Epicurian. I think it's spelled with an "ean," but I'm not positive. I give this one a 20%. But you axed it from your list.
Satire. I give this one a 60%.
Malevolent. This one to me feels like a 70%. This one was also crossed off.
Languish. This one feels like a 50-60%.
Cacophony. This one I would guess is a 40% or lower.

I was thinking of a few more 50%ers (using my new rating system). What about these:

OBELISK
ALLUDE

-RMJ

[M2d]

check-raise

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's spelled with an "ean,"

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct. I am dumb.

No way on allude. It's a literary term and therefore falls closer to 20%.

Let me try again:

Affect.
Frenetic.
Pundit.
Hoi polloi.
Raison d'etre.
Ostensible.
Idolatry.
Iconoclast.

OK, then.

[paland]

You are out of touch RocketMan. Most people read at an eighth grade level or below. Some of the recent polls show that 40% of the American people don't know where Australia or Brazil is on a map. Most do not know very much about most sciences. Do a search online and find these things and you will be surprised at the ignorance of the majority of the people. Some still think the earth is flat.

American technology is not invented by the majority of the people, but rather by the few that take the time and discipline to learn the math and science that are needed to discover and invent. The problem is the majority that uses these machines think that some God made them for mankind. But when they break, they don't call God, they call me or another technogeek to fix it.

[RocketManJames]

I don't know what "hoi polloi" means... hmmm. I'll go look it up. I'll add it to my lexicon (50% word??, haha). This has GOT to be a sub-50% (or maybe it's just a more common word that slipped by me).

Affect: Are you trying to bank that some 50% will produce the incorrect definition (namely, the definition of "effect")? Because, I would think that affect would be a 90+% word.

Idolatry, Frenetic, Pundit: Ya, I agree 50%, maybe a bit higher for Frenetic.
Ostensible, Iconoclast: 30%, maybe 20%.
Raison d'etre: 25% tops, unless of course they took french in school.

New words to assign percentages:

abbreviate
indigenous
gruesome
ilk
hobnob

-RMJ

[Ulysses]

Throughout this thread, the percentages are WAY too high. I'll come back later w/ some estimates and proposed words.

[Sooga]

[ QUOTE ]
Throughout this thread, the percentages are WAY too high. I'll come back later w/ some estimates and proposed words.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely.

I had a long discussion with RMJ yesterday on the and he wasn't just a little off, he was orders of magnitude off. Why do I think I am more correct than he is? I teach high school, I know how stupid the general populace is.

[JTrout]

I agree that most of the words so far fall way below the 50% line.

I'll say:

acquit
foliage
hypocrite
leisure
pronoun
revert

[John Cole]

Talisman?

Most people would think you somehow rearranged the letters.

[RocketManJames]

OK, here are a few quotes from articles at ESPN.com. Now, I would have to imagine that ESPN's writing should not use any sub-50% words... here are a few sentences for us to take a closer look at:

In Game 1, they didn't play with enough pace and all too often looked lethargic and disinterested.

Boxing could use a superfight, something to galvanize the sport.

Instead of bantering about clutch hits, Jackson and Rice talked about clutches.

Another 400 yards and he would join the thoroughbred pantheon.

Truth be told, I didn't look very hard to find these sentences. The question is... what would percentages would you assign the bolded words? We're talking about articles written for ESPN, and not The Economist.

Maybe I'm not THAT far out of touch with reality.

-RMJ

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]

leisure


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the closest I've seen yet in this thread. I don't think any other proposed word has hit the 50% mark.

[Ulysses]

All four are < 50%. Pick up a National Enquirer or US or something.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]

leisure

This is the closest I've seen yet in this thread. I don't think any other proposed word has hit the 50% mark.

[/ QUOTE ]

This blows my mind... you mean to tell me that 50% of native English speakers could not define the word leisure? I don't mean an absolute perfect definition such as one found in a dictionary, but one that demonstrates their understanding of the word.

This is simply AMAZING. If this is truly a 50% word, then I really really overestimate the general population. And, if that's true, that's scary, because I do feel that most people aren't all that bright.

-RMJ

[Ulysses]

Also note that there's a big difference between asking someone what a word means and providing them with the word within the context of a sentence/paragraph.

[RocketManJames]

I agree, providing a word within context is different. But, I wouldn't expect an article from ESPN to use sub-50% words consistently. I really am in calibration mode, because I'm sincerely amazed by this notion that I'm way out of touch with reality.

-RMJ

[JTrout]

My guesses:

lethargic 25%
galvanize 20%
bantering 40%
pantheon 15%

[Ulysses]

No, 50% of people probably know leisure. Maybe 60 or 70%. But not the other words proposed in this thread.

Here's the thing you need to understand.

The majority of people do not read books. The majority of people do not read newspapers. The majority of people don't watch anything of any depth on TV - and by depth I'm talking nightly news.

See what language is used on your average network sitcom. That should be right on target.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
All four are < 50%. Pick up a National Enquirer or US or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

For what it's worth, I went to the National Enquirer website... the first article I looked at (some article about the Kabbalah and Madonna/Demi Moore) contained plenty of words that are questionably sub-50% words. I guess you're right Ulysses, people don't read. Reading ANYTHING gives them a stronger vocabulary than the rest.

A short word list from this article (I could not stomach another):

Numbers in parentheses are MY guesses.

devotees (60%)
hogwash (70%)
congregants (70%)
mysticism (40%)
conduit (40%)
sanctioned (60%)
exorbitant (70%)
esoteric (50%)

-RMJ

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
See what language is used on your average network sitcom. That should be right on target.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I'm bored... so from the Friends episode, "The One Where Rachel's Sister Baby-sits," we have these words. I must admit, that these words are MUCH simpler than those found in the ESPN and National Enquirer articles. So, these MUST be AT LEAST 50% words. I would say much higher, but maybe these really are 50% words. I still have a hard time believing, but you're all doing a good job making me a believer.

Word List from a single Friends episode:

oversight
falafel
thesaurus
prepossessing (purposely used for "brainy" effect in the show)
aortic (purposely used for "brainy" effect in the show)

I guess network sitcoms are a good gauge. Of these 5 words, 2 of them were in the script only because they sound smart. The friends were playing with a thesaurus and demonstrated how some simple sentences could be altered. The other 3 are a stretch in terms of 50%. But, writing for a network sitcom, I would imagine, would limit you to 80+% words.

-RMJ

[danderso8]

Yeah, the context is key. I would say most newspapers/ espn/ etc. are written so that about 95% of the people can understand 95% of what's in an article. You take the examples from your espn articles and replace the words with
"sciapodous" and 95% of the people still get the point (a few of them will even think they learned a new word), even though they have no idea what that word means.

Another thing that I'm sure you often do that less-literate people probably aren't doing is to figure out the meaning of a word from its roots or spelling.


So far, I like Trout's lists best, both his original 50% estimates, and his ratings of the ESPN words.

My addition: degenerate (although i'd probably guess more like 35-40 on that one)

--dan

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
so from the Friends episode, "The One Where Rachel's Sister Baby-sits," we have these words. I must admit, that these words are MUCH simpler than those found in the ESPN and National Enquirer articles.

[/ QUOTE ]

See? I am very smart.

[Duke]

Of course you're out of touch; you play Scrabble.

In the world of Scrabble, most people of any ability whatsoever know:

aa
jo
li
xu
cwm
zek
djinn
toque
ratline
umiaq
suq
qoph
jnana

...

The list goes on.

These are all likely 5% or less words.

As for normal people, 50% words that come to mind for me are:

siphon
psychic
chianti

~D

[andyfox]

.

[JTrout]

.

[SlyAK]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
leisure
This is the closest I've seen yet in this thread. I don't think any other proposed word has hit the 50% mark.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This blows my mind... you mean to tell me that 50% of native English speakers could not define the word leisure? I don't mean an absolute perfect definition such as one found in a dictionary, but one that demonstrates their understanding of the word.
This is simply AMAZING. If this is truly a 50% word, then I really really overestimate the general population. And, if that's true, that's scary, because I do feel that most people aren't all that bright.
-RMJ

[/ QUOTE ]

RMJ,

Have you ever been to a wal-mart??? Look around you, people aren't very bright!!! I agree w/ Ulysses here. Interesting thread btw!

Sly

[Cptkernow]

I dont mean to be over disparaging about the intellect of the average Yank, but this thread can only remind me of a discussion I had with an American student during my exchange year at LSU.

1.Yank " Gee you speak good english, what country are you from"

2. Me "England"

3. Yank "Gee what language do they speak there"

I dont remember the rest of the conversation but it revolved around my other brit mate and me trying to ascertain if the yank was being sarcastic. I can assure you he wasnt, as further questioning revealed he was all most devoid of general knowledge and intellect.

This is the anecdote I allways relate when aksed how dumb exactly are the Americans.

Every European assumes that yanks must be in general quite dumb (with obvious exceptions) because you voted in GWB who I bet can get less than 50% of the 50% words.

Sorry for the over use of the word Yank, but I cant help it when speaking about Americans.

P.S. Before I get flamed/trolled for dissing Yankland to much I would just like to add that if I could get a greencard I would be there to live in an instant, as I think USA is a great country and would make a great place to live.

[fsuplayer]

First visit to the OT forum...I will definately be back! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Re: The EVASIVE 50% word... [Re: RocketManJames]
#739628 - 06/08/04 04:39 PM Edit Reply Quote



I agree that most of the words so far fall way below the 50% line.

I'll say:

acquit
foliage
hypocrite
leisure
pronoun
revert


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with Ulysses and say that this list, with acquit and leisure in particular, is the only list even remotely close to 50% words thus far.
Don't you ever watch that game show "Street Smarts" (i think that is the title).


Most people are painfully stupid and sometimes make me sad/concerned for the future of this country.
Also what makes me worried are the difficulty levels of the classes I am taking at college. I play/study poker at least 30 hours a week while only study about 2hr/week and still manage to embarrass most of the people in the class come test day.

People are not nearly as smart as most of you in this thread are giving them credit for!

FsuPlayer

[Philuva]

I saw a report once that only 40% of Americans could point to the U.S. on a world map. I provided a link that shows a study with high school seniors at 50%, but I also saw one with the general public but can't find that link.

Finding the US on a map (http://www.rehydrate.org/facts/global_illiteracy.htm)

I think you were being a bit aggresive with your initial word choices.

[mosta]

The Friends episode is exactly the right reference, what I was going to suggest. But actually that may slightly overestimate, because there are "writers" involved in its making--who have to type their words and thus try to spell them, on a screen which will make red squiggly lines under their errors (and so they may tend to develop some semblance of literacy). For a more accurate guage, try a reality show. And if you want to be a pessimist, try one on MTV (or something that features under-25-year-olds). I don't feel like Googling to find out, but if that demographic--25 and younger--constitutes say 30% of the population, I might have to put:

develop
increase
intensify

on the list. Well, no, that seems too far, but I most of the suggestions above way over-estimate (estimate*--may be my best guess), I would bet.

[Sloats]

sorry. couldn't resist.

[J_V]

You are way out of touch as well /images/graemlins/smile.gif. You've really got to meet THE PEOPLE.

[J_V]

I learned all my big words watching Dawson's Creek /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

I never thought Valley kids could have such a keen command of the English language.

[mosta]

first:

exemplify
rectify
remedy

So what if the average American doesn't know where Brazil or Norway is or what they speak there? They know it'd be a very expensive trip and they probably don't speak English there. Beyond that, what cultural, social, or political impact do these curious little places have on our daily lives? None. And fact is (I think) Americans typically cover a much broader swath over the course of a life than most Europeans (beyond vacationing). Most Europeans live all their lives, generation after generation, in the same towns and provinces that were independent, competing political entities little more than a century ago (that didn't even speak the same language)--if they aren't still. I think it's rather common for an American to move between country and city, coast to coast, climate to climate, finding different ethnic mixes and accents.

But what about foreign policy? Well you can't expect anyone to already know the details of all the competing factions and interest groups, and all their history, for whatever random place pops into the headlines. What I think is the great source of concern, however, is the moral and emotional simplicity of what seems to be the typical American. Watch the news. Pick any television journalist, and see their unfailing ability to parse any story as a one-dimensional morality play of heros and victims and scoundrels. Dial up the reflex outrage and sentiment. Do I see a tear!? Zoom in tight, wait for it! How do you feel? Did you think it could happen here? Will you have professional grief counsellors available? What about the children!!? And it's not a conspiracy either, to simplify, or dumb down. It's the same on every local news program. Makes one dream of vast labor camps...

And this thread, I think, is quite germane ("The goddamn Germans got nothin to do with it!"). Simple ideas are expressed with simple words and misconstrued grammar and canned, cliched sentiment.

While I have myself found various French people I've encountered to be personally distasteful, and while I do shake my head at various chapters in their history (their dealing with Carlos the Jackal et al) and their political affairs--granted that--I think that accusing the French of ingratitude if not treachery for not supporting the preemptive invasion of Iraq (a move of very questionable validity, and very very doubtful prospects of success) is the most distasteful, disgusting event I've seen in international affairs between supposably friendly, alied nations. The sentiment seemed to sweep across the country, and the political halls. And it's a damning demonstration of American crassness and stupidity--far far beyond any map reading question. The gratitude of the French for the sacrifice of the European invasion is beyond any question. Only and idiot would doubt. And only an idiot would think there could be any comparison between WWII and Iraq. To make that accusation and that comparison--it's incomprehensible and unconscionable--and to use it to try to force your friends into your dirty stupid little war--it leaves one at a loss for words.

[Ulysses]

Question 1: The Oxford English Dictionary has about 750,000 words in it. How many words in the average high school graduate's vocabulary?

Question 2: What percentage of the adults in the US have a bachelor's degree or higher? (the # I discussed w/ some of you yesterday was incorrect, btw)

Answers below in white:

<font color="white">1: About 40,000
2: About 25% (note to those in chat yesterday: the site I looked at yesterday misinterepreted the census data. I went directly to the census site and the 15% figure I cited from them was for bachelor's degree ONLY. It also explains why the graduate degree percentage seemed so high.). About a third of college grads have graduate degrees.

In major metropolitan areas, the percentage of college grads ranges from 40-50%.

I believe a person's guesstimate on these questions will directly relate to how accurate they are wrt picking 50% words.

Googling for terms like reading, vocabulary, and literacy will provide a lot of fun facts to put this thread into perspective. nces.ed.gov and the www.census.gov (http://www.census.gov) also have a lot of interesting facts.
</font>

[John Cole]

First, most people use about 500-1000 words in their daily speech. The average adult has a vocabulary of about 10,000 words. College grads and beyond have vocabularies in the range, perhaps, of 20,000 to 40,000 words, with most people clustered near the 20,000 mark. That leaves another 960,000 words that most people, educated or not, well read or not, don't know. We have many more words in common.

Of course, I continually amazed, shocked, and chagrined at what people don't know.

What percentage know the etymology of "stentorian"?

[mosta]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=739821&amp;page=&amp;view=&amp;sb =5&amp;o=&amp;vc=1

"as someone who is still currently in College"
"Okay, I looked up the word aeshetic, because I did not know what it meant, apparently it pertains to self-denial of something, is that right?"

We can rule out 'aesthetic' and 'ascetic'.

[RocketManJames]

One would expect a typical college student to know the vast majority of 50% words. So, it follows that it is highly probable that both 'ascetic' and 'aesthetic' are sub-50% words.

No longer as amazed, since Ulysses cleared me up with his explanation (correlation between perceived education of the people vs actual education of the people). But, I'm amazed that a college student wouldn't know either of those words.

I also thought... maybe he was referring to 'Hasidic' (since the thread references the Holocaust). I can totally see how someone might not be familiar with 'Hasidic,' but 'aesthetic' and 'ascetic'? Then, of course he provides the definition of ascetic... does this mean that using a dictionary properly might be a 50% task? Now, THAT would be amazing.

Again, I'm no longer as amazed by the state of our nation's native English speakers... just saddened (thanks, Ulysses).

-RMJ