Your wiki page appears to be based solely on the presence of the word in the OED (which includes archaic forms as well as new words that have found common usage) and dictionary.com. I note that five examples of the use of the word starting in 1795 but none more recent than 20 years ago. So I stand corrected, I suppose. I guess it’s an archaic form that has resurrected a handful of times in the last 20-50 years.
Btw, I’m not sure why they include the Dictionary.com reference on the wiki page since Dictionary.com does not include the word sensical. Neither do Merriam-Webster or Cambridge online dictionaries.
Merriam-Webster.com - “sensical” The word you’ve entered isn’t in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.
dictionary.cambridge.org - Search suggestions for sensical. We have these words with similar spellings or pronunciations: …
Your wiki page appears to be based solely on the presence of the word in the OED (which includes archaic forms as well as new words that have found common usage) and dictionary.com. I note that five examples of the use of the word starting in 1795 but none more recent than 20 years ago. So I stand corrected, I suppose. I guess it’s an archaic form that has resurrected a handful of times in the last 20-50 years.
Btw, I’m not sure why they include the Dictionary.com reference on the wiki page since Dictionary.com does not include the word sensical. Neither do Merriam-Webster or Cambridge online dictionaries.
If it’s in the OED it’s a word. That it’s archaic means nothing in a language with over a million words that only uses 3,000 or so on a daily basis.