Sarah please tell me, what the blazes does "refudiate" mean?

[zamboniracer]

Can someone please enlighten me about what Mrs. Palin's definition is of her supposedly new word "refudiate"? I know what it means in fact: that she got her tongue twisted saying "repudiate" and "refute" and she's too stubborn to admit it. But if she says she coined a new word, does she say what it means? From her context it seems to be just a synonym for repudiate.

FYI Merriam Webster says repudiate means:

1 : to divorce or separate formally from (a woman)
2 : to refuse to have anything to do with : disown
3 a : to refuse to accept; especially : to reject as unauthorized or as having no binding force <repudiate a contract> b : to reject as untrue or unjust <repudiate a charge>
4 : to refuse to acknowledge or pay <repudiate a debt>


While refute means:

1 : to prove wrong by argument or evidence : show to be false or erroneous
2 : to deny the truth or accuracy of <refuted the allegations>

Near as I can tell "refudiate" means to have nothing to do with one's own arguments. ;-)

[The Second Stone]

Shakespeare make up lots of words too. Refudiate means to counter an argument with all the thought and rational of a simple repudiation, but with out all the work of refuting.

[RealityChuck]

It's a portmanteau word. Lewis Carroll used them -- things like "chortle."

The difference is that Carroll was using them deliberately. Palin just doesn't know better.

[Skammer]

Didn't she have the twitter post deleted after the mistake was pointed out? But now she's claiming it was intentional?

[Larry Mudd]

Originally Posted by RealityChuck

The difference is that Carroll was using them deliberately. Palin just doesn't know better.

Don't hate her because she's subliterant.

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

She's a bimbocile.

[RealityChuck]

To be fair, it could simply be a typo. Or she could have had a brain freeze and typed the wrong word. It happens. Of course, Palin could never admit something like "I was typing fast and made a mistake." It's illegal for any US politician to ever admit he or she made a mistake or even changed their mind.

[Ravenman]

Originally Posted by RealityChuck

To be fair, it could simply be a typo.

Yes. She was trying to Twitter "refutiate" and a "d" got mixed in there.

[Wheelz]

I'd cut her a break (sorta) for using a bogus word in the first place. It seems "repudiate" fits the meaning she was going for, and she conflated it with "refute". Not really a big deal, though if my every word were as thoroughly scrutinized as hers, my motto would be "spellcheck, spellcheck, spellcheck!"

But then she corrected herself by replacing "refudiate" with "refute," which did not make sense in context. And then she tried to claim she coined a new word on purpose, just like Shakespeare did.

All of this put together just makes her look like a bumbling fool... yet again. I'd have much more respect for someone who said "Yeah, I was typing too fast and screwed that up... oh, well." Sarah apparently doesn't do humility well, though.

[Harmonious Discord]

Sarah doesn't post here anymore. Well she never did, but the point is you should twitter her to ask this question. How appropriate.

[blondebear]

Geoff Nunberg did a commentary on Fresh Air about this:

Refudiate? Repudiate? Let's Call The Whole Thing Off

But Palin apparently never had a duh moment with repudiate, probably because she hasn't encountered it often enough. People don't use it a lot in ordinary conversation as in, "I used to think Peter Frampton was cool, but I totally repudiate that now." You have to frequent the places the word hangs out in, the kinds of books and periodicals that have semicolons in them.

A bit nasty, IMHO, but he does make a good point in closing,

Yet the well-spoken aren't necessarily wiser or better than the rest of us. Most of the horrors that the human race has had to endure in modern times were inflicted at the bidding of men who spoke in shapely grammatical sentences. Unfortunately, eloquence doesn't come next to godliness. A devotion to language will have to be its own reward. Could we just celebrate that?

[Chefguy]

Originally Posted by RealityChuck

To be fair, it could simply be a typo. Or she could have had a brain freeze and typed the wrong word. It happens. Of course, Palin could never admit something like "I was typing fast and made a mistake." It's illegal for any US politician to ever admit he or she made a mistake or even changed their mind.

Don't think so. I can't remember where I first read about this, but she used the word twice, once writing and once speaking.

[Ponch8]

Originally Posted by Wheelz

But then she corrected herself by replacing "refudiate" with "refute," which did not make sense in context. And then she tried to claim she coined a new word on purpose, just like Shakespeare did.

The only difference is that Shakespeare made up words out of cleverness. She makes up words out of complete idiocy.

[mhendo]

Originally Posted by Chefguy

Don't think so. I can't remember where I first read about this, but she used the word twice, once writing and once speaking.

Yeah, i never saw the written version. I only saw this.

[Johnny Angel]

By itself, it's not much to write home about. Lots of people of all levels of intelligence levels take an interest in language and play around with it. But occasionally, you'll find yourself using a coinage meant to be jocular as though it's a normal word. It happens. Suddenly you're in mixed company that doesn't know you and the spurious word "accrumulate" slips out. People who know you have a facility with the language will see it in that context. People who don't will suspect you of being a dolt. It's not a question of whether or not it's fair, it's just one of the things about language -- it is taken to reflect character.

Now, if you were a public figure who already had a reputation for low intellect, it makes a much bigger difference. She can insist that actually she was being quite cheeky and you big meanies are just being jerks about it, but it's a lot better to bank some credibility first. Bush often couldn't help it, because he was caught out speaking off the cuff. But if you're Twittering, you may wish to try out a spell check first. Or have a member of your staff actually write the Tweets.

[Count Blucher]

"Refudiate" is when you order the Rootin' Tootin' Fresh and Fruitin' breakfast at IHOP because you like how saying it sounds, only to discover upon its arrival that it is too horrid and disgusting to swallow.

Kinda like voting for Palin, actually.

Originally Posted by pseudotriton ruber ruber

She's a bimbocile.

+1

[crowmanyclouds]

Originally Posted by RealityChuck

... portmanteau ...

[Sarah Palin] Port Manteau! What a lovely town.
If I ever left Wasila, its high on my list of places to move too! [/Sarah Palin]

CMC fnord!

[Balance]

Originally Posted by crowmanyclouds

[Sarah Palin] Port Manteau! What a lovely town.
If I ever left Wasila, its high on my list of places to move too! [/Sarah Palin]

Bonus points for misuse of "too" and "its".

[BigT]

Originally Posted by Balance

Bonus points for misuse of "too" and "its".

Is "If I ever left" right? I'd want to use either "If I ever leave" or "If I ever were to leave."

[norvalnormal]

And the very first sentence of this transcript has "taken a lot of flack"--so much for cultural literacy nowadays (not to put whoever was responsible for typing up this transcript through the "ringer")

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

I like refudiate. It's what Republicans need to do to Creationists, and what Democrats need to do to Truthers. That is, they need to refute their factual claims and repudiate their politics.

In Palin's case, though, it's miserable to ask Muslims to repudiate the desire for a mosque near Ground Zero, and it's meaningless to ask Muslims to refute that desire, since desires aren't refuted.

[don't ask]

Boy you are dumb. It means effin repudiate.

[Balance]

Originally Posted by BigT

Is "If I ever left" right? I'd want to use either "If I ever leave" or "If I ever were to leave."

No, it's not right--I would use "If I were ever to leave"--but I would never have held out hope for her to get something as high-falutin' as that right. "Too" and "its" could be corrected by as little as a typo, so including them indicates that you're adhering carefully to her style.

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by mhendo

Yeah, i never saw the written version. I only saw this.

Wow, I just thought she twittered it. I had no idea she had spoken it.

[OttoDaFe]

Originally Posted by Balance

Bonus points for misuse of "too" and "its".

And as long as we're handing out points, the Turing SP can't even get the spelling of its beloved home town right.

[mhendo]

Originally Posted by Mahaloth

Wow, I just thought she twittered it. I had no idea she had spoken it.

What i want to know, from that video, is whether Hannity:

a) didn't realize that "refudiate" isn't a word

or

b) caught it, but didn't want to embarrass his golden girl.

If i had been conducting the interview, i would have told her that i was unfamiliar with the word, and asked her to explain its meaning to me.

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

"refudiate" = "I like Gin when I blog! {hic}"

[gonzomax]

Originally Posted by Balance

No, it's not right--I would use "If I were ever to leave"--but I would never have held out hope for her to get something as high-falutin' as that right. "Too" and "its" could be corrected by as little as a typo, so including them indicates that you're adhering carefully to her style.

Yep a typo. P and F are right next to each other on the keyboard. Easy mistake.

[descamisado]

Originally Posted by Skammer

Didn't she have the twitter post deleted after the mistake was pointed out? But now she's claiming it was intentional?

A friend of mine (R.I.P.) used to, in an effect to show how honorable and forthcoming he was, used to Freudianastically say, "When I make mistakes, I omit mine."

Were you channeling my Rogers, Sarah?