Insignificant other

I think that in this case the person is hidden but not in your life and social circle. The fact that they have not yet received the status of being called a significant other meerely indicates that they have not blossomed to their full potential, and that the beauty that can result is meerely hidden. So I think it would be acceptable for descriptive purposes to use the word rose to indicate a positive relationship with an individual, because as buds roses are fairly unremarkable..but when in full bloom they are quite wonderful and exciting. But for every positive there is a negative, where the relationship may be dragging on at an excruicating pace. I think that word turtle could be used in this case. Turtles are mostly hidden and extremely slow and meander at an agonizingly slow pace and steady pace, which unfortunately seems a like a lifetime in the case of an unsuccessful relationship, one in which you wish would be hidden again.

If it hasn't gone on long, it's fresh. The proper scientific term is Phoenix dactylifera.

If it's gone on for a long time, the person is known as a radiocarbon date.

If the relationship is "getting old," the person is an out-of date.

If it feels good to you, they are up-to date.

If you're trying to start a longer term relationship with the person, he or she is a target date.

If you or the other person doesn't know why you're dating but do it anyway, he or she is your blind date.

how about "dating partner"

friend, collegue, assosiate, boy/girl man/woman I'm dating (seeing), admirer, amigo, ami, person, freund, individual...

I like "umm-friend," as in "So-and-so, I'd like you to meet my umm-friend, Such-and-such."

I like the way the French say it: (petit ami / petite amie) lit. "little friend"

I introduce men I'm dating with no description -- just "this is Joe Smith. Joe, I'd like you to meet So and So." If they know me well enough to need to know more...they already know the status of the relationship!

Later on, if we become a "real" couple, and again if anyone "needs" to know, he becomes "my partner."

If I ever marry, I'm going to stick with partner -- husband and wife sounds possessive, legalistic, and really old-fashioned.

rd

How about "gahswith" or "gwith". Short and fast for "goes with". I like it because it's short, unpretentious, and carries no baggage.

I like the word "companion" here. It can imply several levels of commitment, depending on how well the introducer knows the third party.

On 11/3/99 7:28:39 AM, Barbara Wallraff wrote:
>L. Squires, of Pittsburgh,
>Pa., writes, "My friends and I
>have been searching for a term
>to describe a person you are
>merely dating. To say
>'boyfriend' or 'girlfriend'
>invokes visions of schoolyards
>and long-lost days of the
>20-something crowd. The person
>may possibly not even fit the
>description of a friend in the
>early stages of dating.
>'Significant other' implies
>someone to whom you have some
>higher level of commitment.
>Does a word -- beyond just

>their names -- exist that
>describes those people?"
>
>




I like the term "demo-date". It is exactly what the name implies, that you are in a 'demonstration period'. Just trying each other out as it were. Should the relationship blossom beyond "demo-dating" then you could move on to another term.(Caveat Emptor!!)

How about: "datee" (especially if you golf together). Of course you then become a "dator", and a group could be "data". Some-one you are unlikely to date again, but who is still a possibility, could be a "datum". An ex-date becomes a "post-datee" and an upcoming date a "pre-datee". And last but not least: some-one you would like to date: "candidate".

How about the noun "dater" for one who dates.? As in, "This is my dater, Bob."