If you do a search of the entire sdmb for dreck, you get examples people using the word dreck.
If you search the entire SDMB for prate you don’t find prate. You find things like NFL threads mentioning kicker Matt Prater.
I dispute that prate is more common than dreck.
You depute the OED because of a search of this message board? Are you serious?
Yes. I absolutely do not believe that prate is more common than dreck in the United States.
I had no trouble with “prate” or “dreck” (or that word a few months ago that messed folks up). I lost my streak a few weeks back for one of those common words that differs by one letter with a lot of other words - those are the killers for me
A more global search for the US that I just did agrees with you.
I actually prefer that if it’s in Merriam-Webster then anything goes. If it’s an oddity I’ve never heard before I’ll look it up afterwards and add it to my vocabulary.
I started wondering about Matt Prater’s name and whether or not that’s a verb-derived surname like Turner and Baker.
Google says no. It claims Prater as a surname is 870 years old but prater as a noun (a “chatty Cathy”) doesn’t appear until a few hundred years later.
It would have been funny to me if the surname Prater had been originally earned by somebody who just wouldn’t shut the fuck up, heh.
By Sturgeon’s Law, dreck is common everywhere.
My take is the OED is a great resource to learn about UK English. And is not as good a source to learn about US English.
If OED says prate has X commonality, my going in position is they mean “in UK source material”. I don’t doubt they’re right about that.
A secondary question is whether OED measures commonality based on all the published dead-tree output from 1800 until, e.g. 2000, versus measuring the last 15 years of internet retreivable text only. Damned good bet the latter more accurately reflects current ordinary folk’s usage, while the former is a great resource about the dusty musty elitist past of only professionally edited and curated writing being meaningful.
Here’s “prate” on the SDMB
Here’s “prating”
Agree. Prate a little more so, but I immediately knew what it meant. I have certainly run into them both before, although probably in Bronte, or Dickens.
I first encountered “prate” in Doctor Who. I have a vivid memory of Patrick Troughton shouting “Don’t you prate to me about ethics!” to some villain or other.
I kind of guessed and sort of knew what it meant probably because it looks like prattle
Prate definitely is in Jane Eyre.
I’m starting to do this. I’m writing the meaning down, maybe it’ll help me remember the new words.
I have the original pre-NYT Wordle answers and guess list on my computer from … somewhere … I don’t know I downloaded it like 3-5 years ago. Anyway, I was surprised to find that neither “dreck” nor “prate” were on the answers list. Both were on the allowed guess list, but neither was on the target word list.
I’m surprised, because “dreck” is such a normal day-to-day word for me. I didn’t even know it was Yiddish. I’m here in Chicago, and while we do have a Jewish community for sure, the dialect isn’t really infulenced as much by it here as it in in, say, New York. “Prate” I know from reading, I guess, but it’s not a word I would expect as a possible Wordle answer. It’s just odd enough. But it’s really on the cusp.
Than again, we had fucking GOFER as an answer in June a year or two ago. (I got lucky with my first guess and got it in two, but that’s because literally I couldn’t think of another word that could go there, and I thought for sure it couldn’t be GOFER. But it was.)
I don’t live in any major city or metropolitan area, but I consider “dreck” quite a common word. I have not heard of “prate,” and would never have assumed prattle needed a base form. (Its infinitive would of course just be “to prattle.”)
If I found _RATE, I’d go for CRATE, GRATE, IRATE, ORATE, then probably try to see if BRATE, FRATE, DRATE were words before I’d think to try a P. Sure, some of those letter might have been eliminate, but probably not enough.
My first guess was STARE, resulting in 
. So I essentially had _RATE. True, the Wordle could’ve been TRACE or TRADE. Or even TRAPE or TRAVE according to the word tool I sometimes use
(➜ https://5-letter-words.com ◆ ).
Next came CRATE, GRATE, ORATE, and IRATE. After 5 guesses I had:
I used the word tool which presented FRATE, PRATE, URATE, and WRATE. Of these, fortunately I chose PRATE.
My streak of some 550 continued. Barely!
Oh but wait. Today’s Wordle is LOAMY. I’ve heard of LOAM, but rarely LOAMY.
Definition LOAMY = Loamy is an adjective that means consisting of, resembling, or having the characteristics of loam — a rich, crumbly, and fertile soil type.
Agree, except for me not knowing the word at all.
As noted above, I’m not a Wordle player. My ex-wife played it religiously, and between that and various threads here I have the rudiments of how it works. At least enough to make the following comment.
Since the game is quite popular, many websites and apps have been created to help players play more successfully. All of which seems to me to be nothing but cheating in sheep’s clothing. The gameplay consists of two distinct components: vocabulary and logical deduction. Well, actually three as a certain element of luck comes in too when you have a larger search space than you have remaining tries to exhaust the possibilities.
ISTM using any tools whatever to make your plays is like cheating at solitaire. Nobody but you knows what you’re doing. But why do it at all?
I disagree that there is luck involved. All that is necessary is to develop a first four that knocks out the most possible common letters as quickly as possible. For instance, I had all the letters for “Prate” in three, and then guessed it on four. “Taper” was knocked out because I had the placement of the “a” correct.
For a pure vocabulary challenge, there is “Wordle in 1”, and for a speed challenge (which requires different strategy than ordinary Wordle) there is Victordle. But I don’t see any of them as being luck games.