Sorry to burst any bubbles, but the word perturbate was in print when little Sam Clemens was just a child (1844). Here is the proof at a wonderful free site named "Making of America,": http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Flivn%2Fl ivn0003%2F&tif=00082.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin %2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABR0102-0003-38&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50 You will find the word in Question in the second column, in the paragraph that begins with "In conclusion." Terry (librarian on patrol) Terry Ballard, Automation Librarian Quinnipiac University, Bernhard Library 275 Mt. Carmel Ave. Hamden, CT, 06518 203-582-8945 FAX:203-582-3451 http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/libraries/tballard "My memory has a mind of its own." -----Original Message----- From: Robert Slotta [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:59 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: The word "perturbate" I am afraid there has been a misunderstanding about one word. I was just talking about the use of one word, "perturbate." I was not talking about the word perturb, or perturbed, or perturbating, or perturbs, or perturben, or perturber, or even the latin perturbare (per [intensive] + turbare [to throw in disorder]). I wasn't talking about second cousins of the word either. Nor am I interested in the Chinese equivalent of any form of the word. I am simply interested in the word "perturbate" as being attributable to Twain for its first use in print or not. That's all. Those who lack a capacity of concern in this matter need not reply. Thanks, Bob