This is an antonym-free zone

The other day I overheard someone describing something as being unwieldy. I didn’t catch what it was they were talking about but it didn’t really matter. What struck me was that while the word ‘unwieldy’ is used quite commonly, it’s not often I hear the word ‘wieldy’. If you have something that you can wield easily, it’s usually described as being light or easy to carry, or anything almost apart from ‘wieldy’.

And this got me thinking about other words that either have uncommonly used antonyms or apparently don’t have any antonym at all.

Words like unravel. The wool in your jumper can unravel. If your wife leaves you and your pet dog dies on the same day (who knows, maybe she killed the dog to spite you?), it can seem like your very existence is unravelling. But can they ravel back up again? When does anything ‘ravel’? Or is it just a shoe shop? Or the bloke who wrote Bolero?

We’ve all seen people who look a bit gormless. And we all know what gormless means, don’t we? Don’t we? Well, logically it means they lack gorm. But what’s gorm? I don’t think you can be gormful, can you?

Gormless people can often be inept as well. And obviously if you’re ‘in-‘ something you’re the opposite of what comes after that prefix. Inexperienced or indecisive are fine examples. So clearly inept people aren’t very, er, ept. Right. Being ept is one of my finest qualities. Probably.

Finally, and not to boast or anything, but I have a girlfriend. Her name is Ruth. Sometimes when I go out without her, people ask where she is. I just tell them I’m being I’m Ruth-less for once. I know, I’m sorry. But you know where this is headed don’t you? I can’t tell you the opposite of ruthless is ruthful. Or even ruthy. Because that would be truthless.