As opposed to "post conjoinment"? L
On 5 February 2014 20:17, Bill Wootton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Yes, I suppose, L. Rather gives the game away, however.
>
> B
>
> > On 5 Feb 2014, at 10:11 pm, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > post coitum would fit well
> > (if you pardon the expression)
> >
> > L
> >
> >
> >> On 4 February 2014 21:13, Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >> yeah, a neat quick take, Bill, but I second Max's suggestion...
> >>
> >> Doug
> >>> On Feb 4, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Max Richards <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 05/02/2014, at 7:15 AM, Bill Wootton wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Afterspark report
> >>>>
> >>>> Fire in Hurstbridge
> >>>> she said blankly
> >>>> staring
> >>>> at her iphone screen
> >>>> reached for in bed
> >>>> post conjoinment
> >>>>
> >>>> oh it's ok
> >>>> it's been contained
> >>> neat compact telling of one of those fire-season moments in Victoria
> and
> >> elsewhere...
> >>> but:
> >>>
> >>> Is 'conjoinment' a word?
> >>> A Product of Evolution asked 2 years ago
> >>> Coming from the word 'conjoined'.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ms. Worth answered 2 years ago
> >>>
> >>> I don't think it's a very good word -- even if the reader would know
> >> what you mean.
> >>>
> >>> If you need a noun form from the word "conjoined," maybe it would be
> >> better to use the gerund "conjoining."
> >>>
> >>> Is it a sly hint in the direction of 'coition'?
> >>> post-cooital?
> >>
> >> Douglas Barbour
> >> [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> Recent publications: (With Sheila E Murphy) Continuations &
> Continuation 2
> >> (UofAPress).
> >> Recording Dates (Rubicon Press).
> >>
> >> Something else is out there
> >> godamnit
> >>
> >> And I want to hear it
> >>
> >> C.D.Wright
> >
>
|