I am trying to create my own book, and one of those sentences I want to add is:

To him, the images in your memory are blurrable.

The word came out of my mind, but I don't think it is used anywhere before, can't find it in dictionary either.

Found this online but I want to know if using blurrable is fine.

  • 1
    blurrable is in wiktionary but without quotations and I never found how to get to the citations page. and I won't post it to RFV because it seems fine and transparent to me, though I wonder how meaningful it is, if there should be anything that would be nonblurrable. Can something be so crystal clear that it is always in focus wherever you look? – vectory Dec 28 '19 at 5:50
  • It is sometimes used in a narrow programming context, and is certainly a neologism (and jargon) there. – jimm101 Jan 7 '20 at 13:37
  • What do you expect the word to mean? – Hot Licks Jul 25 '20 at 21:07

Images Printed in soluble ink are bllurable with a wet thumb. That's Not a terribly uncommon usage.

  • 1
    Google returns just over 2k hits for blurrable (compared to over 290 million for blur) so its usage seems fairly rare. – KillingTime Jan 27 '20 at 8:39
  • Lots of people have tiny vocabularies. – Wayfaring Stranger Jan 27 '20 at 18:05
  • @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”. – Greybeard Feb 26 '20 at 8:31
  • @Greybeard - I found about 40 uses on Ngram, going back to 1902. – Hot Licks Jul 26 '20 at 3:21
  • 1
    @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. – Greybeard Jul 26 '20 at 8:29

To him, the images in your memory are blurrable.

First, it implies what 'him' is thinking, not necessarily what's actually happening in 'your' mind.

And...it is what the speaker believes 'him' is thinking, not what he is actually thinking, and the words/symbol of meaning the speaker uses, not necessarily what accurately describes what either understands.

That said, it is completely reasonable to describe images in one's mind as blurred, since neuroscientists believe we recreate images in our mind of what actually happened, but rarely as clear as when we they first appeared. But that is not what that sentence is saying--it implies a degree of intentionality, whereas one's mind does what it does without intention. So if you are trying to imply intentionality, leave it as is, but if you are trying to describe how our minds blur images of what we remember, perhaps you say, "...the images in your memory blur over time."

As a counselor and life coach, however, I'm intrigued by the intentionality angle...how blurrable our memories become based on preconditioning and events afterwards. I do not believe the blur comes naturally alone...and when someone wants to blur a memory, conscious or otherwise, they do. So if that is what you are leading the reader to see, then keep it just the way you have it...but understand it might need more development than just one sentence, because not everyone is going to 'get' all of that meaning from one word alone.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.