Independent dictionary · Online edition 1.2 · 10 November 2026
Language has room for what comes next.
The Miller Hoey Publishing Online Dictionary documents proposed and emerging vocabulary. Begin with four words for the relationship between a source, an aspect of it and the person evaluating it.
Concept specifications and editorial direction by Suzanne Hoey. Spellings developed with ChatGPT assistance.
Founding collection: four proposed coinages. Inclusion records this dictionary’s editorial decision; it does not establish acceptance by other dictionaries, universal first use or widespread adoption.
Browse the collection. Four proposed entries, each with a meaning of its own.
Search spelling, full definitions, pronunciation and usage notes. Four founding entries, all proposed coinages.
4 entries
No matching entries. Try a different spelling or a broader meaning.
The vocabulary
Keep the source and the aspect distinct.
Each word is a person noun. The definitions below preserve four different relationships; one situation can meet more than one definition when its conditions are explicit.
A person who genuinely loves, admires, respects, or feels positively toward a source while disliking or disapproving of particular actions, behaviors, characteristics, or outcomes associated with it.
“I’m an amocrit toward my friend: I love her, but I disapprove of that action.”
Positive regard concerns the source. Dislike or disapproval concerns a particular aspect; it does not imply approval of everything associated with the source.
A person who genuinely loves, admires, values, or appreciates a particular work, action, characteristic, quality, or outcome while disliking the person, creature, company, entity, circumstance, or source associated with it.
“I’m a foemirer toward this company: I dislike it, but I appreciate its accessible design.”
The appreciation concerns an aspect; the dislike concerns its source. Independent judgment is a separate question.
A person who genuinely appreciates or evaluates a particular work, action, characteristic, quality, or outcome independently of whether they like, dislike, or feel neutral toward its source.
“I’m a merisorn in this evaluation: I judge the design independently of how I feel about its maker.”
Independence describes how the judgment is made. It can accompany a positive or negative evaluation and can overlap another relationship.
A person who genuinely loves, admires, values, or appreciates a particular work, action, characteristic, quality, or outcome while feeling neither positively nor negatively toward its source.
“I’m a nulavist toward the composer: I love the melody and feel neutral toward its source.”
Neutrality means neither positive nor negative feelings toward the source. It does not mean indifference to the appreciated aspect.
Any source. A specific aspect.
A source may be any person, company, creature, entity, situation, product, action, outcome or phenomenon. These words describe the person experiencing or applying the relationship. Identify the particular source and aspect each time.
Pronunciations are proposed broad English guides. They are design choices, rather than recordings or measurements of established usage.
Try a hypothetical example
Which relationship is being expressed?
Separate the source feeling from the aspect judgment. Then state whether the judgment is independent of that feeling.
Choose a hypothetical relationship to see which definitions it meets.
Merisorn preserves “appreciates or evaluates,” so an independent negative evaluation can qualify. Positive regard for the source plus disapproval of an aspect can also fit Amocrit. Independence is not inferred from neutrality.
Origin & everyday use
A personal language project, shared openly.
Who developed these words?
Suzanne Hoey supplied the four concept specifications, universal source scope and editorial direction. ChatGPT assisted with spelling generation, research and drafting. Suzanne authorized their public introduction.
Are these entries recognized elsewhere?
They are proposed entries in this independent dictionary. Acceptance by other dictionaries is not claimed. Research has not established universal originality, comprehensive multilingual suitability or trademark clearance.
How can I use them?
Use the exact meaning, identify the source and aspect, and give enough context for a reader who has never encountered the word. For example, “I’m a foemirer toward this company: I dislike it, but appreciate its accessible design.”
What do the distinctions imply?
They describe a relationship in a context. They do not excuse harmful conduct, prove moral virtue or establish objective freedom from every bias. Positive regard, disapproval and independent evaluation remain separate conditions.
The examples are illustrative teaching sentences. No human-testing results, adoption statistics or endorsements are asserted. This page documents this project’s public introduction; it does not establish exclusive ownership of ordinary language.
A growing dictionary
Build the vocabulary with us.
Our long-term aim is a collection of hundreds of carefully developed words. The published collection currently contains four proposed entries. New entries will be released as their definitions, pronunciations, prior-use research and editorial review are completed.
We welcome ideas for experiences, relationships and situations that are difficult to express precisely. A compelling concept comes first; a proposed spelling follows research and review.
This is an independent, specialist dictionary of proposed and emerging words, published online by Miller Hoey Publishing, an imprint of Miller Hoey Ventures LLC. It is not a comprehensive dictionary of English. The founding collection preserves Suzanne Hoey’s four concept specifications without merging their meanings.
Usage labels
Proposed coinage: a word introduced for consideration and use. Documented independent use: an entry supported by attributable uses outside this project. Established use: requires sustained evidence across independent sources and contexts. These labels describe editorial evidence, not a vote count. All four current entries remain proposed coinages.
Evidence & review
We distinguish the project’s own dated publications, illustrative teaching sentences and independent uses. No independent-use citations have been added to this edition. Search absences do not prove a spelling has never existed. Future entries require prior-use research, a distinct definition, a pronunciation proposal, source records and editorial review before publication.
Pronunciation & attribution
Respellings and IPA are proposed English guides. No recorded speaker testing is claimed. Suzanne Hoey supplied concept specifications and editorial direction; ChatGPT assisted with spellings, research and drafting. Contributor credit must reflect documented contributions.
Corrections & evidence submissions
Send the headword, the proposed correction and a dated public source link. For a quotation, include the author, publication and context. Repetitions of our own promotional material do not establish independent adoption. New word suggestions should include a definition, pronunciation and known prior uses. Submission does not guarantee inclusion or transfer rights.
This opens your email application; the site does not submit or store a form. Your email provider and the receiving mailbox process the message. Send only information you have permission to share; omit private personal information. We will seek permission before publicly attributing unpublished correspondence.
Editorial responsibility
Editorial direction: Suzanne Hoey. Publishing imprint: Miller Hoey Publishing. Listing a word does not claim exclusive ownership of that word or imply endorsement by another dictionary. Multilingual suitability and trademark clearance have not been established. The site makes no claim of independent expert review.
Publication record
A dictionary with a visible history.
Online edition 1.2 · 10 November 2026: new editorial visual identity, discovery control and public growth plan. Definitions are unchanged.
Online edition 1.1 · 10 November 2026: searchable alphabetical collection, individual entry pages, editorial standards, evidence labels, corrections contact and citation guidance. All four definitions are unchanged.
Launch edition 1.0 · 10 November 2026: first publication of this project’s four founding entries. This is a record of this project’s publication, not proof of the earliest use anywhere.
Future changes will record the date, affected entry and reason. Material definition changes will receive a new edition record rather than silently replacing the documented meaning.