I’ve shared before a little anecdote about my aunt visiting me at the office, and when I introduced her to a coworker this person said, “Oh we love Kismet, she’s always militant about correcting our words!” THAT was the first thing she thought to say about me?! My first impulse was to feel cringey about it, but no more! Instead I’m owning up to who I am: a woman with a magnet on her fridge that says, “I’m silently correcting your grammar.” The tricky thing about those of us in this lofty position, though, is that we really have to know our sh-t, lest we fall ass backwards off the pedestal into a muddy puddle of embarrassment while others guffaw with glee at our comeuppance. Luckily, our friend the Merriam-Webster dictionary is here to help us out on this front. Today’s case study: “supposably.” Before chewing someone’s ear off for using the word, with counsel like, “No you doofus, that’s not a real word, you meant to say SUPPOSEDLY!” M-W reminds us that “supposably” actually is a real word dating back to 1627. Enjoy this entry:

Should we ever decide that our dictionary had a touch of avoirdupois and needed to lose some weight, we could readily accomplish this by looking to Twitter, to see which words people feel are not actually words, and removing the offending specimens. There are many people on Twitter (and in other forms of social media) who think that a good number of the words we enter are not real. One that has come to our attention recently is supposably.

If you began this article with the hope and expectation that you would get to see us spit on our hands, put on our dictionary pants, and tell the people who use supposably that we are very disappointed in them…that’s not going to happen.

First of all, dictionary pants are very tight and uncomfortable, and are only worn in the direst of circumstances. Secondly, most people don’t really spit on their hands before undertaking a taxing or rigorous task anymore; it’s just an expression, and the actual practice is a bit unhygienic. And furthermore, supposably is, we regret to inform you, most definitely a word.

(If there was an emoji that could convey the sense of despair found in the first movement of Shostakovich’s 8th String Quartet we would place it here.)

A common complaint about this word is that it is simply a mistaken use of supposedly. Sometimes this is the case, and sometimes it is not. Supposably may be found as far back as the 17th century. It is rarely encountered over the next hundred or so years, but at the beginning of the 19th century we see much more evidence of it being used.

…What does supposably mean? That’s where things get a bit tricky. In most early uses supposably appears to have a meaning that is distinct from supposedly, having the intended meaning of “capable of being conceived of.” Many people who use the word today, however, appear to intend it to mean something that is much closer to supposedly (“allegedly”). This modern sense bothers some people.

It is simple enough to point out that supposably and supposedly are just the adverbial forms of the adjectives supposable and supposed. However, when you consider that the definition of supposable is “capable of being supposed” (as well as “conceivable”) it is easy to see how these two words have a degree of overlap.

So in summation: supposably is a word, it has a meaning (“as may be conceived or imagined”) that is distinct from most uses of supposedly, but most people who use it nowadays might be better served by using supposedly instead. Now go take your dictionary pants off before they begin to chafe.

[From Merriam-Webster]

Do we buy this as a supposably accurate definition? I supposable so. Except — and it pains me to have to point this out — Merriam-Webster rather undercuts their own sense of authority on the matter of proper language in this article, with the aside comment: “If there was an emoji that could convey the sense of despair found in the first movement of Shostakovich’s 8th String Quartet we would place it here.” M-W erroneously uses the indicative mood (“If there was an emoji…”) which pertains to realities, when everyone knows the correct wording is to use the subjunctive mood (“If there were an emoji…”) when referring to hypotheticals! You know, things that could supposably be true but still technically dwell in the realm of the imaginary. And now I can supposably see why “militant about words” was the first descriptor my coworker thought of for me.

PS — Har har, Merriam-Webster, but I wear dictionary HATS, not pants, thankyouverymuch.

Photos credit: August de Richelieu, Monstera Production, Tima Miroshnichenko on Pexels