Balanced with the sensical, the non-sensical can have a big impact. And sometimes, even if the word is made up, we can gather the meaning of it from the text. Here's a quote from Clockwork Orange (author Antony Burgess): “That's what it's going to be then, brothers, as I come to the like end of this tale. You have been everywhere with your little droog Alex, suffering with him, and you have viddied some of the most grahzny bratchnies old Bog ever made, all on to your old droog Alex. And all it was was that I was young. But now as I end this story, brothers, I am not young, not no longer, oh no. Alex like groweth up, oh yes. But where I itty now, O my brothers, is all on my oddy knocky, where you cannot go. Tomorrow is all like sweet flowers and the turning young earth and the stars and the old Luna up there and your old droog Alex all on his oddy knocky seeking like a mate. And all that cal. A terrible grahzny vonny world, really, O my brothers. And so farewell from your little droog. And to all others in this story profound shooms of lipmusic brrrrrr. And they can kiss my sharries. But you, O my brothers, remember sometimes thy little Alex that was. Amen. And all that call.” What do you think about making up words? Does it take confidence, or belief? Or what?
Burgess, at least in Clockwork (not sure about anything else) was doing something like a cross between Lewis Carroll's nonsensical children's tales and James Joyce's Ulysses. That stuff, if used in the narration itself, will only work in a certain very specific kind of story—one that allows for such whimsicalness. Usually it'll be comedy or children's stories, or pretentious literary stuff like Ulysses. I'm sure there are more I haven't thought of. But my point is that if you want to write like that, you need to set it in the proper kind of milieu, and it most likely won't be one that also allows for much serious writing. Well, it could, but it would have to be be through the distorting lens of that odd talk. They did something similar, but only in the dialogue, with the Buffyspeak in the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer. That way it reflects the characters' wacky way of speaking and doesn't infect the narration or other aspects of the story. And in fact that's really what Burgess was doing, because the whole story is narrated entirely by someone who speaks gibberish. It represents the society itself, a fallen youth culture of unrestrained crime and debauchery where there's been no real education for decades and the street punks all talk like that. At least this is my impression, not having actually read it, though I have seen the movie.
There's a few books I've put aside because I just couldn't get into them; they bested me. A Clockwork Orange is one, more laborious than I was willing to commit towards even understanding what I was reading at a basic comprehension level. It's been said that the reader will get into it, work out the new language and become immersed. It's one I will try again. Having abandoned Ulysses recently, and after a conversation with my sister who suggested the best way to read it is audio book, there's a reading by an actor (of whom I've not heard previously) named Kenneth Whitacre. I have it paused on YouTube, the reading is excellent and the book comes to life, thus far, in a way it didn't when I was slogging through. I need nearly nine hours of not bothering others to listen right through, mind. I've never done audio books before, apart from children's stories in the car (look out for Ewan McGregor's work. Brilliant!) Maybe A Clockwork Orange might work the same? And if it does, then maybe revisit Naked Lunch through the same medium? On a crowded bus!! As to the OP, I've not really made up words but have tried to catch colloquialism (spelt it correctly first time!!), which can set up a barrier in similar terms. To answer your question, I think it takes confidence, belief and what.
I think it's also the kind of thing that will work much better in a shorter story. It might become too grating (or unbearable) in longer format.
Oh, yes I love making up words. Matsep for Material Separator. Sphesterci for Spherian "Sterci" a type of money. And more? In the text I either make the words obvious what they are by having the enviroment/characters interact with them. For example: "That will cost you five thousand Sphesterci." "What! I don't have that much money!" Or: She swung her Matsep against the foe, severing his leg. As the man fell over screaming, she pierced his head with the blade, silencing him. After she pulled the blade out of his skull, she sheated it in her scabbard. Either that or I just explain it through the text directly. "The Matsep was short for Material Separator, a type of bladed weapon that could cut or pierce almost anything. It could be transformed from a sword to a spear and back again." I think made up words add flavour to a text, but only if you do it well. Having too many made up words might make the text hard to go through. For me, I want things to be as smooth as possible, so I pick and choose where I insert them.
That's a good word to describe what Burgess is doing. It produces a sort of devil-may-care voice. Like saying, look at me, I can do whatever I want.
I love the way you use language in your stories. A good imagination, and the writer needs to have a good feeling about words and sounds themselves. I suppose choosing words that sound like what they are is part of it. What do they call that, when the word sounds like what it is?
Onomatopoeia (thanks wordcheck). I don't think inventing words is quite as unusual, though context of real world depictions can make it more unsettling than somewhere like fantasy or sci-fi. Sometimes the words or concepts drift into common usage, such as with 1984. Thanks and right back atcha.
Like make up words that i use on a normal basis? or in my WIPs (or both)? I'm pretty sure I make up words as expletives like when i bump my hip or stub my toe or something of that nature in my WIPs, depending on the story, i'll make up words. like for my SSF WIP that takes place on a mars-like planet with an alternate version of human civilizations, I made up words for different animals (i left their descriptions just vague enough for readers to wonder if its a made up animal, but with identifiable characteristics of actual animals). I like going on the Fantasy Word/Name Generator, too. Its funny because, i'll take a word it made up... and make up my own word based on the generated word. Or I'll make the made up word sound more like something that would suit the world in my WIP. This one, though, had me cracking up laughing: Spoiler: Barbarians!
I try not to make up words -- if only because I write historical fiction, so if I make something up, it can be easily checked. Having said that, I do extensive research into the period that I write in (e.g. 1st-century AD Rome, 7th-century BC Babylon, 4th-century BC Greece) and try to find as much as I can about the period: people's names, mode of dress, the food they ate, their architecture, weapons, how they fought wars, the money (or otherwise) they used -- things like that. Then, I sprinkle these terms lightly -- very lightly -- through the story. For instance, one of my stories is set in Greece, c. 12th-century BC. A master swordsman is presenting his pupil with a xiphos - i.e. a double-edged, one-handed, Iron Age sword, used by the ancient Greeks. (See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiphos). I don't, however, go into all that stuff. The master simply hands over the sword and says gruffly: "Here it is, lad. My best xiphos." If I tried making up words, I would inevitably look foolish. ;-) So, I don't!
Fake words should spring from self-evident etymology. My favorite, and I'm modestly proud of its invention, is encrapulation. It isn't a word yet it communicates clearly. When something is encrapulated, it is a thing of some utility rendered useless by unnecessary and probably comedic disaster. Sometimes, though, real words have all the tongue-in-cheek impact you need. Take recrudescence. It obviously shares root meaning with crud. Or maybe it doesn't. Go with me here. Crudescence seems like it would be a measure of cruddiness. The "re" prefix indicates this would be crudescence taking an encore. Sure enough, recrudescence is the recurrence of an undesirable condition. Now, I must get back to writing. That won't be recrudescence, but I can't guarantee it won't be nonsense. It's a burden I bear.
Sometimes you just have to make up a word that should but doesn't exist, like "unsmokably." It repeated its journey around the circle like a moon orbiting an unseen planet until the formerly massive joint was unsmokably small.
Sometimes I like making up names for Greco-Roman deities that didn't exist but should have. For instance, "Ombudsmania" -- the goddess of getting an industry ombudsman involved in every petty dispute. "He stole my sandwich from the fridge!" "Yeah? Well, he tried to poison me with his super-spicy sandwich!" "Oho, so you ADMIT that you stole my sandwich!!" Meanwhile, the HR manager is rubbing his temples and thinking "Give me strength..." Encounters such as these are considered supplications to Ombudsmania.
Sure, but usually for names. Like for example, I created a race from the planet Noise, and every one of their names has something to do with sound. For example, someone is named Miaul, the old word for "meow." Someone else is named Terwa, as in the central letters of "caterwaul."
Yes, but words rarely need to hide any scars or fade away the shake-up. And they don't leave any keys on a table, or create a fable.
Speaking as a person for whom English is a second language, too much of that sort of thing (in writing) is difficult to read. *shrug*
