# equipable or equippable?

This topic is 4510 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

## Recommended Posts

In my RPG I use the word "equipable" somewhere. I don't know which is the correct spelling however: equipable or equippable? I tried dictionary.com but it has neither words. I tried google, and both equipable and equippable return around 25k results, so it seems the Internet also doesn't know the spelling. Is there a rule in the English language for letter doubling when adding -able to a word? P.S. by "the Internet" I mean the people who use it of course ;)

##### Share on other sites
I tried looking it up in a, god forbid, real dictionary [wink].
Looks like its one of those words that is only really used within RPGs (i.e. doesn't really exist outside of gaming... correct me if I'm wrong) and since most of them use 'equipable' i'd say you are safe with that bad boy.

##### Share on other sites
I think 'equipable' looks best.
If you are able to equip an item             |      |         ------------         |   |it is equipable.

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by LodeI tried dictionary.com but it has neither words.
Be warned that that is a US English dictionary, which will potentially have different spellings to 'International' English. You can use the Cambridge dictionary online for free (unlike Oxford), which will list US variations along with the English spelling (flagged as UK).

I have never heard of the word, in any case.

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by EnselicI think 'equipable' looks best.If you are able to equip an item | | ------------ | |it is equipable.

woo, colours...

Yea, i'd go with equipable

##### Share on other sites
It's like, a sword is equipable because you can equip it and get the stats from it, while an apple isn't equipable, it's edible though. Typical for RPGs, yeah, in real life you don't call clothes or swords "equipable" :D

##### Share on other sites
The rule of thumb is to double the ending consonant when adding suffixes (the suffix is "-able" in this case) unless it's already doubled. More precisely:

Quote:
 If the word is one syllable or is stressed on the last syllable,-- and has a single final consonant,-- and that single final consonant is preceded by a single vowel sound,-- and the suffix begins with a vowel,-- then double the final consonant.

Thus:
-- control becomes controllable (not "controlable");
-- run becomes runnable (not "runable");
-- swim becomes swimmable (not "swimable");

but:
-- pass becomes passable (not "passsable");
-- climb becomes climbable (not "climbbable");

Since "equip" is two syllables, has the stress on the second syllable, ends with a single final consonant, is preceded by a single vowel sound, and the suffix begins with a vowel, then we should double the final consonant:

-- equip becomes equippable (not "equipable").

A big hint is to note that other suffixes (e.g., "-ed" and "-ing") are spelled with the doubled final consonant ("equipped" and "equipping"). Additionally, if you type "equipable" into Google, it'll ask you if you meant "equippable".

hope that helps,

[Edited by - kSquared on July 13, 2006 11:30:25 AM]

##### Share on other sites
Nice explanation, although I didn't really get the single vowel sound thing (ui being two vowels)

Quote:
 Original post by kSquaredA big hint is to note that other suffixes (e.g., "-ed" and "-ing") are spelled with the doubled final consonant ("equipped" and "equipping"). Additionally, if you type "equipable" into Google, it'll ask you if you meant "equippable".

Heh, then your google has another spell checker than mine, when I type equipable or equippable in google, in both cases it asks if I meant "equitable"

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by LodeNice explanation, although I didn't really get the single vowel sound thing (ui being two vowels)

A vowel is different from a vowel sound. In English, a vowel is one of the letters {a, e, i, o, u, y}, depending on context (sometimes other letters can be vowels too). However, a vowel sound has no bearing on how many vowel letters comprise it: it's a sound represented by the combinations of those letters.

For instance, the "ui" in "equip" is pronounced like "ih", exactly like the "i" in "pit". Both constitute one and the same vowel sound, even though "ui" is two vowels and "i" is one vowel.

A diphthong is more than two or more smoothly connected vowel sounds, irrespective of the number of actual vowel letters. "House" is a diphthong; you transition from an "o" sound to a "u" sound, and "ou" is two vowels. But "kite" is also a diphthong; you start out saying "ka" and end up saying "ite", so you transition from "a" to "i", yet there's only one vowel.

hope that helps,

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by kSquared[...]But "kite" is also a diphthong; you start out saying "ka" and end up saying "ite", so you transition from "a" to "i", yet there's only one vowel.[...]
Do you pronounce 'kite' significantly different than the example at Kite on M-W(click the red speaker icon to hear it), are you saying that "ka" is intrinsic to the letter 'k', or something else?

1. 1
Rutin
40
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5

• 18
• 20
• 12
• 14
• 9
• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
633364
• Total Posts
3011517
• ### Who's Online (See full list)

There are no registered users currently online

×