NYT Spelling Bee 2-18-21 final

Hello from Day 26 of the reopening of California. Today is National Drink Wine Day. Not to be confused with National Wine Day, which we all know is May 25. Rather than drink wine, Calah and I watched Sour Grapes. Wine and scandal together. What could be better?

Yesterday I missed ATILT, TIDILY, TIDY, TILT, and VIVIDITY.

Meatier Misses

LILT: A characteristic rising and falling of the voice when speaking; a pleasant gentle accent.

With not much to go on, I figured I’d find the etymology of the word.

From etymonline: 1510s, “to lift up” (the voice), probably from West Midlands dialect lulten “to sound an alarm” (late 14c.), a word of unknown origin. Possible relatives include Norwegian lilla “to sing” and Low German lul “pipe;” the whole loose group might be imitative. Sense of “sing in a light manner” is first recorded 1786. Related: Liltedlilting. As a noun, 1728, “lilting song,” from the verb. As “a rhythmical cadence,” 1840.

Lul sounds a lot like lull. I wondered if there was any relation between the two. So…

cf. lull:

early 14c., lullen “to calm or hush to sleep,” probably imitative of lu-lu sound used to lull a child to sleep (compare Swedish lulla “to hum a lullaby,” German lullen “to rock,” Sanskrit lolati “moves to and fro,” Middle Dutch lollen “to mutter”). Figurative use from 1570s; specifically “to quiet (suspicion) so as to delude into a sense of security” is from c. 1600. Related: Lulledlulling.

I guess there isn’t, then? Strange.

Today’s summary

Final score: 19 words for 102 points.
Genius minimum: 94 points.
First word: PADDING.
Pangram: ADAPTING.
Tweet:

This entry was posted in NYT Spelling Bee, Other Games and tagged , , , , on by .

About raabidfun

I'm a guy living the #raabidfun lifestyle. I figured I would create a blog about crossword puzzles I do. The idea is to do the NYT crossword and the WSJ crossword daily as much as I can. That includes when I don't finish and have clearly failed. They can be difficult. Also I am not an attorney, and any legal analysis in this blog reflects my interpretation, which means it can be flawed and should not be relied upon for use in legal matters (especially against me).

Leave a Reply