Archive — Peer Rejected

[1]

REJ:2026.08.02.0001 quant.LG (Quantum Linguistics) Rejected

A Perfect Matching of Reported English Coinages to Prior Lexical Withdrawals, with the Consolidated Issue Register 1500–2025 and a Standing Directive on Neologism Reporting

H. M. Ockendon, T. A. Ezeoke, K. Sævareid, P. R. Mistry & The Registrar of Coinages

Comments: 6 pages, 6 figures, 0 reproducible results. Rejected in 40 minutes on Aug 2, 2026.

Abstract: English is reported to gain several hundred words a year. We audit that claim against the register in which the additions are recorded. Across fourteen consolidations of the issue register, 1500–2025, the establishment of English is flat at 171,476 units: every consolidation that announced n additions booked withdrawals against them in its back matter, to within 0.03% of establishment. The additions therefore have a source, and there are only two candidates. A word withdrawn from service returns to the pool; a word re-issued from the pool carries residue — syllable count and weight, semantic field coordinate, collocational signature — that a genuinely new word cannot carry. Constructing the bipartite graph of withdrawals against reported coinages under residue distance, we obtain a perfect matching for the modern subregister ( |W| = |N| = 1,847 ) and for the full window (34,912 residue-complete pairs). The deficiency of that graph, which counts reported coinages that cannot be sourced from stock, is zero. Under 500 permutations of the residue assignment the maximum matching falls to 213 pm 19 . The annual coinage rate tracks the withdrawal rate lagged 57 years ( r = 0.94 ) and tracks cultural novelty at r = 0.03 . Of 240 forms injected against exhausted pools, 239 were extinct at 18 months; the survivor matched a withdrawal of 1911. Coinage is not observed. We issue a standing directive on the reporting of additions.

[abs][pdf][bibtex]

[2]

REJ:2026.07.09.0001 quant.LG (Quantum Linguistics) Rejected

Swift-Footed Autocomplete: The Homeric Noun–Epithet System as a Zero-Click Predictive-Text Engine, with a Defect Audit of Its Longest-Running Production Incident

Philomena Q. Hexworth-Adeyinka, Telemachus J. Braithwaite-Osei & Dagmar V. Papastavrou-Lindqvist

Comments: 6 pages, 4 figures, 0 reproducible results. Rejected in 9 minutes on Jul 9, 2026.

Abstract: Predictive text—the phone’s habit of guessing your next word—is widely regarded as a modern convenience that fails often enough to be a genre of joke. We show that it is instead an ancient technology that once worked flawlessly, and that its finest deployment has been in continuous production for roughly 2,750 years. Building on Milman Parry’s observation that the Homeric epithet is selected by the space remaining in the verse rather than by the situation—hence “blameless Aegisthus,” an epithet bestowed on the epic’s principal murderer—we demonstrate that the noun–epithet system of the Iliad and Odyssey constitutes a zero-click completion engine. Conditioned on name, grammatical case, and metrical slot, epithet choice carries 0.032 bits of information: the bard, on average, chooses nothing. We audit the system’s fabled economy as a lookup table and find a 0.9 % collision rate; we show in a randomized trial ( N=48 ) that the engine reduces compositional latency 8.7 -fold, to near performance speed; and we measure a semantic defect rate of 0.31 % , roughly thirty times more reliable than the autocorrect in the reader’s pocket. Modern predictive text fails, we argue, because it guesses meaning inside an unconstrained interface, whereas the hexameter constrained the interface until there was nothing left to guess. Our recommendations include a meter.

[abs][pdf][bibtex]

[3]

REJ:2026.07.08.0001 quant.LG (Quantum Linguistics) Rejected

Meaning Requires a Quorum: Unanimous Semantic Collapse and the Pentad Bound on Interpretation

Wilhelmina Ascott-Pryce, Théodore Nkondo-Vasquez & Priya Halvorsen

Comments: 6 pages, 6 figures, 0 reproducible results. Rejected in 9 minutes on Jul 8, 2026.

Abstract: It is treated as a figure of speech that a listener knows what you mean. We show that it is a capacity theorem. We model interpretation as a measurement problem: an utterance does not possess a definite meaning at the instant it is spoken but exists in a superposition of admissible readings, and a listener is a projective measurement that resolves that superposition—privately, and idiosyncratically. Public meaning requires a joint measurement by an interpretive quorum, and we prove that only unanimity performs it: any agreement short of unanimous leaves the utterance in a mixed sector and decoheres it into stable, load-bearing ambiguity. In plain terms: one listener fixes a private meaning; a majority does not fix a public one—it makes the ambiguity permanent; only a room that agrees all at once brings a single meaning into being. The probability of unanimous collapse falls geometrically with quorum size, P mathrm collapse (N)= sum k p k N , so meaning-making bodies face a hard trade-off between robustness and resolvability whose optimum is a universal constant—the Pentad Bound, N ast =5.0 pm0.3 . Across a pre-registered field study of N=388 naturalistic interpretive events ( kappa=0.83 ), a controlled polysemy-dosing experiment on 240 participants, and 10 4 Monte-Carlo runs of an interpretive lattice, the collapse rate obeys the predicted d 1-N law, the Consensus and Babel phases are separated by a continuous transition with mean-field exponent beta= tfrac12 , and the optimum quorum sits at five in every method. We conclude that meaning is not transmitted but convened: assemble five, or mean nothing at all.

[abs][pdf][bibtex]