2

So I was writing a sentence and the word majoritively popped into my head as a "Hey, why not? Sounds good!" type of word.

My sentence was to the effect of:

Our GridViews majoritively use classic bindings from the its ItemsSource property which is usually bound to an ObservableCollection of an entity data object, where then each GridViewColumn is bound to its respective (or matching) entity data object property.

Note: This sentence contains words that are control names.


I know I can switch the sentence around to use "The majority of the time".
I was just curious about the specific word.

8
  • Google Books claims 38 instances of the word. But that's in over 20M books, so I'd be inclined to dismiss that handful as "ignorant errors". Commented Oct 20, 2014 at 20:26
  • @FumbleFingers - Hmm ... your statement of "ignorant errors" would then conflict with @FraserOrr's answer. Could you write answer that would expand further on why it wouldn't be considered an actual word? Commented Oct 21, 2014 at 15:18
  • Well, it's really just a matter of opinion, primarily based on how you define "a word". In total, there are obviously billions of words indexed by Google Books. This particular form (which is easily understood by anyone on first encounter) only occurs 38 times, and it doesn't appear in EOD. If Wiktionary were a paper-based publication we'd probably call it toilet paper, so an entry there doesn't really confer any "status". My advice is "Don't use it", but strictly speaking it's all Primarily Opinion-based, and therefore Off Topic. Commented Oct 21, 2014 at 16:03
  • @FumbleFingers - I agree with your assessment of Wiktionary =D. When you look it up at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/majoritively it doesn't come up and that's usually my go-to. So maybe you're right. It's just opinion-based and should be closed? Commented Oct 22, 2014 at 16:28
  • 2
    I obviously haven't made myself clear. Per my first comment, I consider it to be an "ignorant error", and per my second comment, my advice is DON'T USE IT! The intended meaning will be obvious to any native speaker, but they will also almost certainly understand an unwanted subtext (that you don't know English very well and/or you're making a fool of yourself by trying to use what you think are "posh" words). Commented Oct 23, 2014 at 15:13

5 Answers 5

4

Yes, majoritively is a word. As one of our resident professional linguists so succinctly put it:

If you use the word when speaking English, then it is an English word.

Now that that’s out of the way, what are we to make of the word majoritively? To start with, it comes from applying two common, productive suffixes to the existing word majority:

  1. -ive converts a noun into a adjective or another noun
  2. -ly converts an adjective into an adverb or a noun into an adjective

The second of those is incredibly productive; the first, somewhat less so, although as ‑ative it is fairly lively — just perhaps not quite so much as ‑ize is.

The OED tells us this about -ive:

-ive, suffix, forming adjs. (and sbs.)

Formerly also ‑if, ‑ife; a. Fr. ‑if, fem. ‑ive (= It., Sp. -ivo) :– L. īv-us, a suffix added to the ppl. stem of verbs,as in act-īvus active, pass-īvus passive, nātīv-us of inborn kind; sometimes to the pres. stem, as cad-īvus falling, andto sbs. as tempest-īvus seasonable. Few of these words came down in OF., e.g. naïf, naïve :– L. nātīv-um; but the suffix is largely used in the modern Romanic langs., and in Eng., to adapt L. words in ‑īvus, or form words on L. analogies, with the sense ‘having a tendency to, having the nature, character, or quality of, given to (some action)’. The meaning differs from that of ppl. adjs. in ‑ing, ‑ant, ‑ent, in implying a permanent or habitual quality or tendency: cf. ACTING, ACTIVE, ATTRACTING, ATTRACTIVE, COHERENT, COHESIVE, CONSEQUENT, CONSECUTIVE. From their derivation, the great majority of these end in ‑sive and ‑tive, and of these about one half in ‑ATIVE, which tends consequently to become a living suffix, as in talk-ative, etc. A few are formed immediately on the vb. stem, esp. where this ends in s (c) or t, thus easily passing muster among those formed on the ppl. stem; such are amusive,coercive, conducive, crescive, forcive,piercive, adaptive, adoptive, denotive, humective; a few are from sbs., as massive. In costive, the ‑ive is not a suffix.

Already in L. many of these adjs. were used subst.; this precedent is freely followed in the mod. langs. and in English: e.g. adjective, captive, derivative, expletive, explosive,fugitive, indicative, incentive, invective,locomotive, missive, native, nominative,prerogative, sedative, subjunctive.

In some words the final consonant of OF. ‑if, from ‑īvus, was lost in ME., leaving in mod.Eng. -Y: e.g. hasty,jolly, tardy.

Adverbs from adjs. in -ive are formed in ‑IVELY; abstract sbs. in ‑iveness and ‑IVITY (F. ‑iveté, ‑ivité, L. ‑īvitāt-em), as in activity, conductivity, resistivity, and similar terms; also spec. (see quot. 1895).

I’m a bit surprised you went for majoritively rather than majoritatively, in that ‑ative tends to be the “living” (read: productive) version as explained above.

It’s so productive, it has its own entry:

‑ative,

ad. F. ‑atif, ‑ative, L. ‑ātīvus, consisting of adj. suffix ‑īvus (see ‑IVE) appended to ppl. stems in ‑āt- of vbs. in ‑āre, e.g. dēmonstrāre to point out, dēmonstrāt-īvus ‘having the attribute or habit of pointing out, tending to point out.’ Only a few were used in Latin, but the analogy is extensively followed in the modern languages. In the majority of instances, as in demonstrate, demonstrative, adjs. in ‑ative belong to vbs. in ‑ate; cases like represent, ‑ative, affirm, ‑ative, figure, figurative, in which the Eng. vb. represents (through Fr.) the present stem of the Latin, have afforded a formal analogy for talk, talk-ative.

A few adjs. of this class are moreover formed directly from sbs. in ‑TY, as if from an intervening verb in ‑tate, which does not exist; e.g. AUTHORITY, (*authoritate), authoritative; so qualitative, quantitative.

That’s why I was somewhat surprised that you didn’t just go from majority straight into majoritatively. Some people do. In fact, all these can be found in print:

We can tell from the definitions of the suffixes what these words MUST mean.

There are only a few dozen instances of each found in Google Books, so it is not as though these were especially common words. Even so, most citations are found in recent publications; they seem to have gained some traction in the 21st century.

I cannot say why that might be, but I will note that many books no longer go through the rigorous redaction process of draft, review, rewrite, copyedit, and proofread; it is possible that some of these might have been more felicitously phrased if they’d had a competent copyeditor to smooth out the wording.

In most instances, majoritively and majoritatively are used purely as synonyms for the simpler mostly. However, in some cases, they take on a different nuance because they are specifically talking about some sort of majority being involved.

So your instinct to derive this word using productive affixes is not original: other people have done the same thing, and a few of those even managed to find their way into print.

It is not a word that I myself would advise using; I think in almost all scenarios, a simpler wording is both possible and preferable. Much of the writing cited above is, I feel, a textbook example of how NOT to write — and just possibly, how NOT to derive new words without sounding risibly overbloviated.

But you really need to look at the in-print citations for yourself to see how these are being used by other people, and then decide for yourself whether you care for them or whether you might care to choose another way of expressing it. Constantly piling on derivational affixes to create new words can be ugly.

Again, check these citations and see for yourself:

5
  • 'majoritive' sounds wrong to me but 'majoritatively' sounds OK. Some suffixes work in some contexts some in others. But what does either actually mean?
    – Mitch
    Commented Dec 23, 2014 at 16:53
  • @tchrist Very nice! I never even thought about majoritatively. It makes much more sense to me now. Thanks. Commented Dec 23, 2014 at 22:36
  • M-W's Usage Discussion of irregardless: Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. >> ... Commented Feb 27, 2015 at 13:41
  • 1
    It would be nice to have a term for an 'acceptable word'. 'Word', perhaps. Commented Feb 27, 2015 at 13:42
  • But what does 'majoritatively' or 'majoritively' mean? (and does that meaning come from these word formation patterns).
    – Mitch
    Commented Apr 25, 2017 at 12:59
2

Majority is overused, anyway. Best to restrict it to matters of voting.

Usually, the word most works just fine. Instead of majoritatively, use mostly.

1
  • Mostly is definitely a more proper word for sure, but I like going against the grain, though, that's why I'm a maverick! Or ... as my daughter calls me, a hipster, because I am usually onto things first and then turn on them when they become popular ... LoL! I also like to expand my vocabulary and not always stick with the most common, dull routes. That's why I was just checking to see if it was really a word or not. Commented Oct 21, 2014 at 15:15
2

Yes, see:

Wiktionary: Majoritively

By means of a majority.
(proscribed) Consisting of more than half (50%); predominantly.

However, it certainly isn't a common word, and honestly, I don't see that it fits well in the example you gave. You might instead choose "usually", "frequently", "commonly" or "most often" instead.

1
  • Yea ... I saw that prior to posting, but was wanting some more expert advice. I don't usually trust any wiki-type site without further research to back up what's said in there. Commented Oct 20, 2014 at 15:57
0

I refuse to believe 'majoritively' is a word when it doesn't exist in the OERD. You can use majority quite easily. Why not just use, "The majority of our GridViews'?

-ive = in the nature of. How can you be in the nature of a majority?

-ly = does indeed describe the quality of a thing, but so does -ty.

Why have we suddenly started making words up that not only make no sense, but also confuse people's established understanding of the word? Simplify don't confuse.

4
  • Good points for sure. Commented Apr 25, 2017 at 12:13
  • 1
    Sorry CM, but I just joined because this question irritated me so much I had to respond. I know nothing of this point system of which you speak. But thanks :)
    – eatmywords
    Commented Apr 25, 2017 at 12:22
  • No worries. All viewpoints are considered. The reason I asked the question originally was that, often times, words just pop into my head that aren't of the ordinary ilk. Simply for curiosity's sake. Commented Apr 25, 2017 at 12:27
  • It's cool CM. I do the same sometimes, but it's much easier to go the simpler route, for yourself and whoever is reading your work.
    – eatmywords
    Commented Apr 25, 2017 at 12:44
0

“Almost all of these schools are majority white—in fact, black men make up only 2.4 percent of the total undergraduate population of the 65 schools in the so-called Power Five athletic conferences.”

“Presented with a choice between Clemson and North Carolina A&T, most high-school athletes would choose Clemson—whose starting lineup, not incidentally, is majority black.”

"The flight of black athletes to majority-white colleges has been devastating to HBCUs."

I saw these lines in an article and it doesn't seem right. But Websters doesn't have an adjective for majority... I cannot find majoritively or majoritatively.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/10/black-athletes-should-leave-white-colleges/596629/

2
  • I'm not sure how your examples sentences relate to the existence of majoritively as a word. Demonstrating that majority is used doesn't prove or disprove the usage of majoritively. Commented Sep 6, 2019 at 19:11
  • These were sentences I saw in print and felt majoirty had been used incorrectly. I was asking if it should have been written using majorititvely instead of majority. Majority, a noun, in this sample is being used as an adjective. But Webster's doesn't have majoritively or majoritatively as words.
    – Christina
    Commented Sep 7, 2019 at 18:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .