Timeline for Using the word 'Blurrable' in a sentence
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2020 at 1:16 | vote | accept | Shiz | ||
| Jul 26, 2020 at 8:29 | comment | added | Greybeard | @HotLicks That seems reasonable. You'll probably agree that there is nothing wrong with "blurrable" but it's one of those words that there isn't much call for, and so, although it is there if you want it, it gets little use. | |
| Jul 26, 2020 at 3:21 | comment | added | Hot Licks | @Greybeard - I found about 40 uses on Ngram, going back to 1902. | |
| Feb 26, 2020 at 8:31 | comment | added | Greybeard | @KillingTime. Google does not give "over 2k hits", it gives 123 hits as the search results end on (for me) page 2 with "In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 123 already displayed." However, a good number refer to "Blurrable" as a proper noun and others are dictionary-like offerings. That said, there are 10 or 12 results that show a reasonably educated use, like this one from Sunday Reading – The New Inquiry 27 Oct 2013 - "... the lines between machine and organic humanity, Haraway-like, shows that those lines are in fact blurrable”. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 18:05 | comment | added | Wayfaring Stranger | Lots of people have tiny vocabularies. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 8:39 | comment | added | KillingTime | Google returns just over 2k hits for blurrable (compared to over 290 million for blur) so its usage seems fairly rare. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 8:05 | review | Low quality posts | |||
| Jan 27, 2020 at 12:36 | |||||
| Jan 27, 2020 at 7:46 | history | answered | Wayfaring Stranger | CC BY-SA 4.0 |