Made up terms

I think this is all a matter of what the author feels is right. Whether it be a matter of small, select few inclusions of original work or a complete glossary.

Personally I used to have the attitude that everything had to be origional, especially when I first started writing in my late teens. Call it teenage rebellion or youthful enthusiasm but in my most recent work I think I've found a balance.

I'm still of the mind that I create and name my own creatures as the idea of J.K Rowling becoming a multi-millionaire by including almost every known creature in mythology in her work like a savage slanderous circus is something I never wanted to do. But then again, there are only so many original names you can come up for something that is, say, a giant spider.


This is something I've been meaning to ask for a while, will be great to see the responses.

Anthony Burgess pulled off writing A Clockwork Orange with about ten percent of the words semi-invented. I didn't understand the novel until I found out that most of his words are Russian-derived and I could use a Russian/English dictionary to work out what he meant, but other people said they eventually got almost all of the neologisms from context. It depends how well you're able to insinuate meanings via subtle cues. Definitely don't do too much word creation if you're a fan of the definition dump.

jdwhitelaw said:

I'm still of the mind that I create and name my own creatures as the idea of J.K Rowling becoming a multi-millionaire by including almost every known creature in mythology in her work like a savage slanderous circus is something I never wanted to do.

Click to expand...

There's no virtue to being poor. Personally, I'd happily distribute photocopies of my butt if it would make me a multi-millionaire.

But it wouldn't; I'm not following in Rowling's footsteps because I'm not Rowling and it wouldn't work.

As for the question itself, obviously it depends on the work and the world. Heck, even if you were setting the story in the real world, almost any culture other than your readers' would have unfamiliar words for things--a story set in China will reference different foods, clothes, plants, holidays, customs, etc., from one set in Pakistan or Africa. These give a story life and vigor, but if over-used, can just be silly. (EG, a pot is just a pot, no matter where we are.)

I would say that invented terms ought to be kept to a minimum because they will tend to annoy readers. Very few people want to consult a glossary. The invented terms we do use should be ones that are used so often that readers will have no trouble recalling their meaning.

Vomaxx said:

I would say that invented terms ought to be kept to a minimum because they will tend to annoy readers.

Click to expand...

Hear, hear! I finished reading a novel set in the future where the F-word was replaced by 'Joining'. And doncha know, it was joining this and joining that, and I got totally annoyed about halfway through. Remember how the Smurfs did the same thing? About halfway through any cartoon, I was about to smurf up.

Keep the neologisms to a minimum, I say. I've read some highly touted fantasy that read like slogging through a swamp, there were so many linguistic oddities. Then again, if you're positing a world where the dinosaurs never died out (Harry Harrison), then you will need new words. Look at Dune - it had to have a glossary, and it was massively famous. Then again, Stranger in a Strange Land got away with just a single neologism - "grok" - that was so integral to the work, you still hear regular folks use it in conversation.

Just don't goof around with words to relieve yourself of creating a sense of the different in your work. Just joining don't, smurf, or smurfette.

I do UF and I'm very careful about the number of made up words I use. As much as possible, I try and reserve the made-up words for names and occasionally foods/places.

So I have people who can teleport (but call it shifting/fading) and conjure stuff (require), so that gives people a nice safe grounding.

I'll have people eating in the fae equivalent of McDonalds munching on burgers and fries (though they may be llama or imitation-unicorn burgers), but include a dish or two that has a made-up name (like brikni or aole), and just casually drop it into the conversation as it's being eaten, but because you've started with burgers, the readers are less put-out.

As a reader, my opinion on made-up terms has changed dramatically over the years. I still remember fondly flipping through Robert Jordan glossaries, but that was usually after the rest of the book was put aside and I wanted to take a stroll back through the "world" of the book. I think you have to be careful, and I think you have to balance it in a way that makes sense for you and for your reader.

If you're ever in doubt about adding a made-up word, I'd argue against including it. Making the world seem unique is probably better handled by showing common words describing uncommon things.

Dagrami said:

I'm with you on this - I think it certainly adds to the world to use them, and makes it seem more convincing and immersive.

I am aware that it can go too far. I'm hoping it won't get to the stage where I actually need to include a glossary for anyone to understand what the story's about!

Click to expand...

I minored in anthropology, so I may have a little more tolerance for this than some But in general, if it's obvious from context, you're probably pretty good. I figure it's the sort of thing you can always change later if you want to, so I wouldn't stress too much either way.

and no discussion of inventing terms would be complete without the link to “Call a Rabbit a Smeerp“ (located in the Turkey Lexicon with many gems).