“Lexophile” describes one who has a love for words and wordplay, such as “you can tune a piano, but you can’t tuna fish”, or “To write with a broken pencil is pointless.” An annual competition is held by the New York Times to see who can create the best original lexophile.
The paragraph similar to the above appears with almost every reference I can find to this NY Times contest and collection. It got me curious and puzzled. It seems to define a lexophile as a person and as a clever creation of such a person, without making any distinction. I suppose this ‘double definition’ is not unusual, but I was curious.
When I Googled the word all I got was some variation of the phrase in the first sentence above. And NONE of the (informal?) online ‘definitions’ even mention the second usage as the corresponding creation or byproduct. (Try it yourself).
But even ‘curiouser’: It turns out that ‘lexophile’ is not even a real word! It is NOT listed in Merriam Webster’s latest online dictionary. So, even though the word does not officially exist, it seems to appear every so often, and apparently in a variety of contexts.
I know, I know – I think I’m wondering the same thing myself: Don’t I have better things to do? Who can account for curiosity?
Thanks for the additional info, Larry. BTW: I immediately recognized your opening pic for this blog. I was there a week before you on my way to the Albuquerque Balloon Fiesta. And, yes, I do see the seal balancing a ball.
Hi Liz! Thank YOU for sending along the fun list! I get a kick out of this kind of humor (as you know!) WOW – the Balloon Festival!! A bucket list item for us – I’m envious!
I went through the same process when I was going to share the funny list with another editor and realized HE would catch this terrible mistake (calling the figure of speech a “lexophile” after already defining “lexophile” as a person. I barely remember my 2 years of Ancient Greek in college, but I do know that “lex” means “word” (as in “lexicon”) and “phile” means “love” (as in “Philadelphia,” the city of brotherly love). So, when I sent the list, I just did a little friendly editing and changed the intro to the list to read thus “An annual … who can create the best original sample of wordplay most worth the love of lexophiles.” I probably spent (wasted?) more time than you did, because I tried to find out if the NY Times made the original error. I think I’ll continue that search (it drives me crazy) and let you know if I discover anything. Best wishes.
Thanks, Eliza!! Interesting all around! 🙂