A note about “Glond.”
In a recent strip about Boggle, I used the word “glond” ostensibly as a made-up word, a word so obviously silly that no one could take it seriously, but yet which could be argued to be somehow real.
Well, here is a note from Marksman Nikolardo, who sends the following pictures to support an argument I would not have believed without documentation. This dictionary is used in the Nikolardo family for both Boggle and Scrabble:
And in this dictionary, there is a certain page…
And on this page there is something miserable:
Now, then: Nikolardo points out that the bottom section of the page, where “glond” is found, is a special space for “words which were variants and/or archaic at the time this dictionary was printed, which was 1918.” So it can be argued that “glond” is not really a word. Not anymore.
And what is glond? “Awlwort” or “Cowherb.” THOSE ARE NOT WORDS EITHER.
Due to this overwhelming evidence I am going ON THE RECORD as declaring “glond” NOT A WORD, either now or EVER IN THE FUTURE. Glond is BLACKBALLED from the English language FOREVER.
What a glommox we have made of this situation! (Thanks for the pictures, Nikolardo!)
December 7th, 2010 at 3:42 am
I read this in the voice of Morbo from Futurama.
December 7th, 2010 at 4:34 am
Awlwort and cowherb are both in the OED, so they are distinctly word-like. I wonder, though, if this is one of those words lexicographers invent and sprinkle into their dictionaries to prevent plagiarism: if another dictionary includes this word, it has clearly copied wholesale from Webster’s.
December 7th, 2010 at 6:51 am
Dang, more proof that everything you read on the internet just isn’t necessarily TRUE. I am appalled.
December 7th, 2010 at 7:07 am
So, cowherb is a real word, as it is a real plant… see http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showimage/2219/ and http://wisplants.uwsp.edu/scripts/SearchResults.asp?Common=cow-herb Enjoy your strips!
December 7th, 2010 at 7:32 am
Google backs you up: “define:glond” yields no results. Google does, however, ask you if you meant to ask for a definition of “blonde”.
I expect to see “personalized” ads offering me great deals on glonds within the hour.
December 7th, 2010 at 8:59 am
I just love the English language for quirks like this 😀
December 7th, 2010 at 9:22 am
I WANT THAT BOOK.
Sorry for shouting, but I REALLY want that book.
December 7th, 2010 at 9:30 am
I have added “Glond” as a disambiguation page to Wikipedia.
Now it is reliably disbelievable.
December 7th, 2010 at 9:45 am
I’ve been reading Wondermark for several years now and really enjoy your work– when I saw the new items in the store, I wished that I had the extra money just to show my support (and they are bomb) but since I don’t, I’d like to express my gratitude here that Wondermark exists, is free, and is funny as hell. Thanks for your excellent contribution to the comics universe. It’s grand.
December 7th, 2010 at 11:00 am
Sir, you have glondt us too many times. I do not believe your assertion that “glond” is not a word.
December 7th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
The OED doesn’t list Glond, so it’s definitively made up! On the other hand it does list awlwort and cowherb, but as two different plants, make of that what you will.
December 7th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
I was about to say “but it’s even in Wikipedia”, but then I saw Yamara’s comment. I’m now going to wait for someone to add a link to this page as supporting evidence. I probably won’t have to wait that long.
December 7th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
I just submitted an entry for the OED. You can’t stop it now!
December 7th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Are you sure those photos haven’t been tampered with? Nikolardo might be glonding you.
December 10th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Maybe it’s a fake entry, like you can sometimes find in lexicons (also, maps!)? While it’s a discipline of scientific jokes in lexicons, I think in dictionaries and maps sometimes small deliberate errors are included to reveal rip-offs. At least I seem to remember to have read something like that.