Maybe a dumb question, maybe not...seems like one of those 'tweener adjectives. Is this, or is this not a word? "Unduplicated" is, of course, but I have a perfect spot to use "unduplicatable" on a back cover description to emphasize that certain things will never/can never be repeated. But is this word technically okay to use?
https://www.wordsense.eu/unduplicatable/ https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unduplicatable It's not in the Oxford Dictionary on-line or Merriam-Webster on-line, but less respected sources seem to recognize it so, unless you are writing for a strict academic audience, I'd say go ahead and use it.
What an ugly, ugly word. I just threw up in my mouth thinking about it. Sounds like a back-formation word that has probably attained grudging acceptance from popular usage over time, but like SapereAude mentioned, I'm not surprised that it's not recognized by formal dictionaries. I'd imagine you'd need a laser focused passage about "duplicated" things to even consider using it. Something like, "After the cloning facility chemical spill in Flint, Michigan in 2034, Sally Jo was the only member of the Johnson family to be unduplicated." Even then I wouldn't use. Too gross for me.
Unduplicable however is a word, and a somewhat better one IMO. But unsurpisingly, spellchecker refuses to recognize it. There's also Induplicable, which seems to be another constructed word, taken from a Spanish one.
I agree it's not a "pretty" word and a total mouth/eyeful but in this one sentence it fits because I'm referencing things that can not and will not be duplicated. Some of these things happened, but will not happen again. Even Homer's cloning facility example is far more likely to occur than what I'm referring to lol. "Unduplicated" in this sense feels like it could be duplicated at some point, it just hasn't yet. The crazy unofficial word has more finality to it. I don't have to use either of course...but it just popped in there and, ugliness aside, thought it was an interesting word to debate
Irreproducible is a word in Merriam's. You could also go with the simpler "incomparable," or save even more syllables with "matchless."
Who cares if it isn't in the dictionary? Derivationally speaking it looks just fine to me and the calculus is very simple: un (in) + duplic(at) + able, resulting in a word which is identical in form to lots of other ones. I prefer the ones Xoic came up with though; I think the t is ugly.
But the verb is "duplicate," so that which cannot be duplicated should be unduplicatable. To use "unduplicable," the verb would have to be "duplic" -- which it is not.
Unduplicatable is quite a mouthful, so you need to change words. I agree with Seven Crowns, you could use irreproducible but I'm not sure if it would fit in the story you're making. Try using the phrase "impossible to duplicate" or "not duplicable". You can use it in a dialog like this: Joseph: Are you done yet? We need an exact replica of the jewel if we want our theft to succeed. Luthios: Not yet, our duplicating device isn't working. It's almost impossible to duplicate this! Joseph: Just work what you have and try to make it similar to the jewel. I'll come up with a plan. Luthios: Yes sir.
That's almost exactly what I'm referring to! Yes, that mark won't be duplicated. Nor will Christy Mathewson's 3 complete game shutouts in 5 days in a World Series, or Addie Joss's 76 pitch perfect game in under 2 hours. Given how today's game is, stuff like that is impossible to see again. Hence my playing around with this crazy word
Inimitable and irreproducible are good ones. Either of those would work. At this point, it's almost a case of whether or not "unduplicatable" is an official word or not, instead of whether it's applicable in the sentence I thought to use it in.
Pete Rose's 4k bits, Nolan Ryan's 5k strikeouts, Rickey Henderson's however many steals... there's a few ridiculous things on that list.
Jack Taylor's 187 consecutive complete games, Old Hoss Radbourn's (my avatar) 60-win season...there's a lot of crazy milestones that will not (not can not) be duplicated, hence my need for the proper adjective. In the end, I think "irreproducible" is going to be the one.
It's just as big of a mouthful and a real traffic-stopper of a word. I would lean toward a phrase instead, like never-to-be-repeated.
I've been trying to guess which one you were before I googled it. Glad to see I never would have gotten it.
Also, as I mentioned, this is just part of a sentence on a back cover description for a non-fic baseball book. It's not part of any narrative or dialogue. I just spied one little slot where I could drop in a fancy word that stresses the fact that certain things will not be reproduced---not "can not", which is what "unduplicated" implies to me in this context. For example... COULD someone throw 187 consecutive complete games again? Sure, it could be done. But will it? Given how modern baseball is with the DH, bullpen usage, starting pitcher monitoring, etc...it's a damn firm NO that it will never happen again
Is... Is "duplicatable" even a proper word? I'm being serious here. I consider myself very, very good at English but it's still my second language.
My arbiters for questions like this are the Merriam-Webster online dictionary (I still consider Merriam-Webeter to be the most authoritative dictionary for American English) and the Oxford online dictionary (more oriented toward British English). https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duplicable "duplicatable" is a recognized alternate form "Duplicatable" apparently is not not recognized by the Oxford Dictionary
