Category talk:English words that use all vowels in alphabetical order

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Deletion debate[edit]

Green check.svg

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

Category:English words that use all vowels in alphabetical order[edit]

Borderline dictionary material. I can only think of six anyway. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

From memory, it's one of those odd lists that Scrabble players love. abstemious, abstemiously, caesious, caesiously (highly improbable) facetious, facetiously. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Keep and expand: lots of people like this particular bit of info, so we might as well have it, either as category or as appendix. Category seems best, so people who know one word can very easily find the others.​—msh210 18:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Unofficial keep - I like such lists :) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 18:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
The National Scrabble Association (of the U.S.)'s Official Club and Tournament Word List, Second Edition, has abstemious, abstemiously, abstentious, arsenious, facetious, and facetiously (found via perl -ne 's/ .*//; my $tmp = $_; s/[^AEIOUY]//g; print $tmp if $_ eq "AEIOU" || $_ eq "AEIOUY"' OCTWL2.txt). —RuakhTALK 19:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
While I'm not good with Perl syntax, it looks like you've omitted words (if any) containing additional Ys before the U, and also those (if any) of containing additional copies of individual vowels in their correct place, like (the made-up word) yaneelingous.​—msh210 19:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Right. There's a lot of ambiguity in the category name (e.g., something like "sacrilegiously" technically uses all the vowels in alphabetical order, too, but the extra <i> somehow seems to disqualify it), so I modeled my one-liner on Mglovesfun's examples, none of which used any vowel twice, and none of which included <y> except optionally once after <u>. (Though on second thought, the latter property was probably coincidence; counting <y> entirely as a consonant would likely yield the same list. So I guess induction also generates ambiguity.) Anyway, Conrad's grep below, aside from the typos (unbalanced single-quotes, stray <s> in the first character class), matches your interpretation. :-)   —RuakhTALK 00:14, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
From Index:English: Conrad.Irwin 19:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
$ cat English.fil | grep '^\([^aeious]*a\)\+\([^aeiou]*e\)\+\([^aeiou]*i\)\+\([^aeiou]*o\)\+\([^aeiou]*u\)\+[^aeiou]*$

And abstemiousness. It depends on the definition. If you need the Y, that limits it a lot. What it really means is "AEIOU in order without any other vowels" because abstemiousness does use all five vowels in order, but then add another E. Admittedly my category title is not a good one, but in British English I find the title above ungrammatical, a bit like Category:French terms with mute h. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

In I mainly nominated this because I thought someone else might nominate if I didn't, a bit like finding three usable cites for a rare word before an actual RFV. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I do think we should have this category, but, as noted, its name is ambiguous. Perhaps move, though I don't have any good ideas.​—msh210 18:25, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Category:English words using all five vowels in order only once (each). A bit long, I know. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:48, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Move to an Appendix, then delete. --EncycloPetey 17:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Appendix sounds better. L☺g☺maniac chat? 17:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
But a category is easier to find, right? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
No. --EncycloPetey 02:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes. -- Prince Kassad 00:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

'Keep' I have seen such things noted in dictionaries. Anyway why shouldn't we be different here. Albatross2147 05:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Kept. As for the name of the category and what it should be categorized in, that I don't know. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)