Talk:Episode 7834

DUSKER

Sorry but I disagree that DUSKER is allowable. Not all adjectives are comparative, the fact they are monosyllabic does not change this principle. Correct examples of comparative and superlative would be DUSKY, DUSKIER, DUSKIEST. Monosyllabic or not, Oxford Dictionaries Premium almost always specifes adjectives in both comparative and superlative forms, but DUSKER is not specified. The historical OED also contains no examples of DUSKER in any of its records, which date back to 1225. In short, I do not believe there is such a word as DUSKER and Dent's decision was correct. --CountdownChloe (talk) 19:06, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Chloe, as is often the case, you are incorrect in your assertion.

DUSKY is an adjective. Its comparative and superlative forms are DUSKIER and DUSKIEST respectively.

DUSK is a separate adjective. Its comparative and superlative forms are DUSKER and DUSKEST respectively.

Understandable that Susie got this wrong, given how easy it is to conflate DUSK and DUSKY. That's probably how the error arose, just as your doubling down on her error arises from the same confusion. But the simple fact here is that Dent's call was wrong.

Any remaining doubters must learn to accept this with good grace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayum (talk • contribs)

Er, I didn't conflate them. I gave DUSK and DUSKY as two separate words to clarify why one has comparative adjectives and one does not. Not all adjectives are comparative, which you conveniently chose to ignore. I also don't think it's very 'graceful' to say that I am often wrong, but there we are. There is no such word as DUSKER or DUSKEST and I backed this up with evidence. If you choose to ignore that, or not look into it any further, that's your prerogative. --CountdownChloe (talk) 14:32, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry petal, but you're still wrong about this.

The Countdown rules CLEARLY state that with any monosyllabic adjective, the comparative and superlative forms are acceptable for play as a default. There is no grey area here.

You say "not all adjectives are comparative"... Is that so? The onus is now on you to provide a valid example of any monosyllabic adjective in the English language for which your statement is accurate. Ball's in your court. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayum (talk • contribs)

Okay, so there are two things to say about this. Firstly, there are admittedly not many monosyllabic adjectives which aren't comparative or superlative, but one example of this is the word DEAD. There is no DEADER or DEADEST. Dent has often said that to be valid, words must either be specified in OPD or used in example sentences. If not, they are invalid, and this supercedes the monosyllabic adjective rule. Otherwise you would have words like DEADER and DEADEST being waived through despite not existing. And whilst no one is infallible, I am confident Susie Dent interprets the rules more accurately than any of us could.

The second thing to say is that it is clear from this exchange that you are incapable of having a neutral, sensible discussion about ambiguous rule interpretation, first resorting to insult and then to misogyny. This sort of hubris and arrogance (and sexism) has no place in the Countdown community, and it is no wonder so few women participate in Countdown when people like you behave in the way that you do. And at least I'm happy to identify myself by leaving a signature --CountdownChloe (talk) 21:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

It is commonly said that the contestant guidelines state that comparatives and superlatives do not need to be specified for single syllable adjectives, and this is the reason that DUSKER should have been permissible. Perhaps someone who has filmed recently could provide the actual wording from the guidelines and put this to bed? DUSKER and DUSKEST are valid in scrabble so they're not completely ridiculous. TheWikiMan (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Chloe, it's ok to be wrong. As wikiman and myself have patiently explained, the Countdown rules as outlined to each contestant in advance of their screening are clear. Had you ever been a contestant, you would be aware of this already. If you feel offended, that is a pity, but for my part, all I have done is to point out that it is often the case that you are incorrect in your assertions. Anyone who is in the Countdowners fb group knows this already. I am surprised if it is coming as news to you. The second thing I did was to call you "petal". That's a term of endearment. I expected you would have appreciated it as that. At least I did not publicly accuse you of being "a carousel short of a funfair". Only a truly nasty person would do that. Anyway, take care. xxx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayum (talk • contribs)