# The accuracy of 'accuracywise'

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217>\
**Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\
**Created:** [July 28, 2014, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217 "2014-07-28T07:02:37Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 6\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Occa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/41988e/32.png) [@Occa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Occa)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2014, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217/1 "2014-07-28T07:02:37Z")

</div>

I notice that the all caps disclaimer at the bottom of each post written by people other than Cecil uses the ‘word’ “accuracywise”. I’m surprised no one’s picked up on this.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Lucretia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@Lucretia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucretia)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2014, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217/2 "2014-07-28T09:48:49Z")

</div>

It’s a neologism. Did you understand the concept that the author meant to convey? Then it’s a perfectly cromulent word.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2014, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217/3 "2014-07-28T12:18:38Z")

</div>

It means “with regards to accuracy”. Is that not consistent with how it’s used?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Occa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/41988e/32.png) [@Occa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Occa)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2014, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217/4 "2014-07-28T13:05:54Z")

</div>

I was just pointing out that it should have a space between the two words–or at least a hyphen.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2014, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217/5 "2014-07-28T13:12:57Z")

</div>

Which two words, “accuracywise” and what else?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2014, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-accuracy-of-accuracywise/694217/6 "2014-07-28T15:47:42Z")

</div>

Just so people know, the OP is referring to the disclaimer at the bottom of Staff Reports:

> [@](#):
>
> Staff Reports are written by the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board, Cecil’s online auxiliary. Though the SDSAB does its best, these columns are edited by Ed Zotti, not Cecil, so \*\*accuracywise \*\*you’d better keep your fingers crossed.

Of course, accuracywise is one word. It’s similar to all other -wise neologisms, which can be written with or without a hyphen as the coiner prefers.

[Grammarphobia.com](http://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2010/02)

> [@](#):
>
> Such compounds used in the same way but meaning “as regards” or “in respect of” are more recent, and this is where relatively new words like “mediawise” come in.
> 
> These terms are labeled “colloq. (orig. U.S.)” in the OED, and the first citation given is from 1942: “there are two types of hydrogen atoms positionwise.”

Your understanding of how the English language works ain’t too hot, wisewise.