5

On more than one occasion I've attempted to say something like: It depends on the object's aerodynamicicity and had to stop myself before finishing the last word.

Is there really only one option: to just re-word the sentence into It depends how aerodynamic the object is or is there another word I could use here?

Why should something like opaque and aerodynamic both be handled differently? Both are adjectives that can be swapped in and out of each-other's sentences, yet when it comes to saying something like: It depends on the object's opacity we can't swap opaque and aerodynamic anymore.

(I'll accept aerodynamicicity should probably be aerodynamicity if this rule is allowed to work here.)

Alternatively, should the term be aerodynamicry - as with mimic and mimicry?

-

(The same question applies for hydrodynamic or just dynamic.)

(Opaque (opacity) could be substituted for ferocious (ferocity) or generous (generosity), etc.)

Improve this question
17
  • 2
    I think it should be aerodynamics: merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aerodynamics
    – user 66974
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 15:08
  • 2
    Perhaps aerodynamicality? (But really I agree with the previous comment, aerodynamics is the right word.)
    – nnnnnn
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 15:13
  • 2
    What about 'aerodynamism'? urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Aerodynamism
    – Ram Pillai
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 16:58
  • 2
    The term is drag but it runs in the opposite direction. More aerodynamic means less drag.
    – Phil Sweet
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 17:30
  • 2
    One can always say “drag coefficient” not just “drag”
    – Jim
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 20:47

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
4

One reason that aerodynamicity is awkward is that it's new.

OED has opacity first appearing in 1575; mimcry in 1671; ferocity in 1606 and generosity before 1500.

However, dynamicity is listed, as "A synonym of valency or atomicity. (In modern dictionaries.)" I'm not sure what "modern dictionaries" means; the entry dates from 1897.

Since dynamicity is known, one might expect aerodynamicity to be fine. But it isn't.

It isn't because it's just too cumbersome. Dynamicity already has five syllables, and that's really the maximum in normal use. Aerodynamicity could appear almost unnoticed in a scholarly work, but it doesn't really fit into day-to-day discourse. The best course of action there is to rework the sentence.

Improve this answer
2
  • Given dynamicity is permitted, could aero-dynamicity be justified if aerodynamicity is not?
    – Rogod
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 20:10
  • 1
    That is something I'd considered. It's pronounced almost as two words, with a small pause at the hyphen. That would make it easier (and put it into the "five syllables or fewer" set).
    – Andrew Leach ♦
    Commented Jan 11, 2020 at 20:12
2

Since aerodynamic, when used to mean low drag and streamlined, is a layperson's term and uses the term as a quantifier rather than just as pertaining to forces of moving air, it is the wrong term to try to nominalize and get the meaning of the degree of low dragginess. (Just how it came to be used that way eludes me.)

Better by far is to use the rearranged sentence you posted in your question.

There are a couple of uncommon and unattractive alternatives.

  1. Aero slipperiness. This is used exactly as you want to use it. It appears to be established in road bike racing lingo at least, and it is instantly recognizable.

  2. Streamlinedness, usually used selfconsciously and sometimes in quotes. This seems to show up mostly in biomechanics discussions.

Improve this answer
0

You're using the word "aerodynamic" the wrong way to begin with. The word "aerodynamic" is not indicative of how streamlined something is. A correct use of the term would be this: "In order to find how much drag is induced by the body, and how to remedy it, you will need to study the aerodynamics of it first". You would not say, "I need to study how aerodynamic the body is". Aerodynamics encompasses fluid mechanics of compressible gasses moving around a body. When you say the word "aerodynamic" it should always be followed by a noun such as "properties" or "forces".

Improve this answer
1
  • 2
    You need to add authoritative references to substantiate such direct claims. And note that ELU deals with general English usage considered acceptable, not merely (and sometimes not) stipulative definitions used in say Technology Institutes. CD includes the example 'an aerodynamic car' and Lexico 'aerodynamic [adjective] ... 1.1 Of or having a shape which reduces the drag from air moving past.' Whether the adjective is gradable is another matter.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Mar 10, 2021 at 16:44

You must log in to answer this question.

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