Talk:Eggcorn/Archive 3

Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here

This topic is particularly necessary to clarify the relatively new topic of eggcorns.

• nothing wets your appetite instead of whets your appetite (in an advertising campaign by A&W many years back)

(Submitted by Williampfeifer on 11 November 2008 22:04. Please submit here, and provide explicit citations before adding to the Wiki page.) Cnilep (talk) 10:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

This sounds to me like a deliberate, humorous substitution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.53.167 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 7 January 2010

• to the nail instead of tooth and nail

(Submitted by anonymous user at IP 24.59.3.83 on 21 February 2009.) Cnilep (talk) 15:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Did 24.59.3.83 give any documentation of this one? I think it’s a beautiful example as long as it’s standard for somebody who does not have “tooth and nail” also standard. This includes a stipulation that it not be a purposefully invented pun. (If it was purposely invented, but now is standard for someone else who wasn’t involved in the invention, it’s a kind of doubtful case, seems to me.)--Lavintzin (talk) 17:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

The submitter offered no sourcing or analysis, which is why I moved it here. A discussion has begun at The Eggcorn Forum. Cnilep (talk) 16:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• hone in instead of home in

This one is on the page, and has been for quite some time. I note, however, that the sources cited for it are somewhat equivocal. The Eggcorn Database notes that while The Columbia Guide to Standard English calls hone in an error, American Heritage lists it as standard. Similarly, the Language Log posts suggest that the two phrases were first used in print at around the same time, with home in probably a few years earlier. It is perhaps a problematic example for this page. Cnilep (talk) 15:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

• "anal nitrite", which is also eggcorned as "amyl nitrate".

Asat (talk) 05:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Anal nitrite appears to be a classical malapropism rather than an eggcorn. Eggcorns make plausible sense in the same context as the original phrase - they are usually more sensible than the original, in the mind of the eggcorn-user. For anal nitrite to be an eggcorn, users would have to believe that it has something to do with anus. For amyl nitrate to be an eggcorn, users would have to believe that the compound contains a nitrate ion, and have some idea of what that means. Cnilep (talk) 12:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

• Oh, and "another thing coming" instead of "another think coming". Sad, because it means the speaker completely missed the joke set up by "If you think...."

Asat (talk) 07:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

There is a long-ish discussion of another think/thing coming in /Archive 1, under "Of thinks and things". Cnilep (talk) 11:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

• "on the horns of an enema" instead of "on the horns of a dilemma"

Added by User:InFairness on 8 April 2009 with the edit summary "added". Cnilep (talk) 14:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, a non-eggcornical malapropism. As the article states, in an eggcorn

The new phrase introduces a meaning that is different from the original, but plausible in the same context ("old-timers' disease" for "Alzheimer's disease"). This is as opposed to a malapropism, where the substitution creates a nonsensical phrase.

“The horns of an enema” is nonsensical, and all the funnier for that, but all the less eggcornish.

--Lavintzin (talk) 18:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

• "new killer weapons" instead of "nuclear weapons"

b0Rn2bL8 (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like a pun (intentionally re-worked as a joke) rather than an eggcorn. Do you have a source that analyzes it as an eggcorn? Cnilep (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

• pour over instead of pore over

Added by User:Short Brigade Harvester Boris on 21 May 2009 with the comment, "a personal fave". No sources or other discussion included. Cnilep (talk) 17:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

It's on the "official" list.[1] To me it brings a particularly humorous mental image (e.g., someone pouring a pitcher of liquid over documents). Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 17:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Here's a direct link to the relevant Eggcorn Database page. This might be used as a third-party source, if there is consensus to return the example to the page. Cnilep (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

• statue of limitations instead of Statute of limitations. From Seinfeld....""I don't think it's an actual *statue*""

Added by IP user 68.230.145.114 on 7 June 2009 with no other comment. Cnilep (talk) 20:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

• mating name instead of ''[[Maiden Name]]''<ref>{{cite news|last=Saner|first=Emine|title=Tiny eggcorns, mighty gaffes|pages=2|publisher=The Guardian|date=2006-10-05|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1887732,00.html|accessdate= 2009-06-15}}</ref>

Added by IP user at 66.30.12.221 on 17 June 2009. It is properly sourced, but I'm moving it pending vetting for the sake of consistency. Also, the formatting was slightly off. I've used 'nowiki' tags to make the formatting visible. Cnilep (talk) 23:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

To be explicit, what makes the formatting "slightly off" is the attempt to link to a non-existent Wikipedia page (a "red link"). The links after examples are generally to the standard word or expression at Wiktionary; use the format [[wikt:maiden name]]. Note that, unlike Wikipedia, Wiktionary links are fully case sensitive, including the initial letter. Please double check to make sure you're not creating a red link. Cnilep (talk) 23:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

What Eggcorns are not

The page currently paraphrases a Mark Liberman blog post from 2003 (without fully explicit footnoting, by the way) in which he reasoned that an eggcorn is not folk etymology, not malapropism, etc. Soon after that piece was posted, however, other linguists were suggesting that the various phenomena actually overlap, and within a few months Liberman himself was using eggcorn to describe novel usages that are either (relatively) widespread or homophonous. I therefore submit that the third paragraph and accompanying bullet points should be removed from the main page. Objections? Cnilep (talk) 19:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Hearing no objections, I have made the change. Cnilep (talk) 01:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

That's why blogs are invalid refs for wikipedia: blogs are unfinished blurbs. - Altenmann >t 02:31, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I generally agree that blogs are problematic as references; certainly they are insufficient as reliable sources to establish notability or support factual assertions. With this in mind, I have removed a 2004 blog entry from the "Further reading" section. On the other hand, I left the 2003 Language Log posting where the word egg corn was first used in this sense. It is not a reliable source, but as a primary source, it is of historical interest. This is also supported by mainstream media pieces, which are generally considered acceptable as reliable sources. Cnilep (talk) 17:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Completely agreed: 2003 is a valid reference to a primary source, admissible in encyclopedic context, to show history, even if the guy gave a totally wrong definition, but not as a source of wisdom. - Altenmann >t 18:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Mixture of Mondegreen and Malapropism?

Could it not be argued (as suggested above) that the Eggcorn is actually a mixture of Mondegreen and Malapropism (assuming you allow those constructions to make sense). Basically, an eggcorn is a misheard word/phrase reported by the hearer in some fashion (i.e a mondegreen) and then used mistakenly by the hearer and others in utterances of their own as a substitute for the intended similar-sounding word/phrase (i.e. a malapropism). If so, it aught to be explained in the article. Also, I'm not convinced by the statement "[t]his is as opposed to a malapropism, where the substitution creates a nonsensical phrase.", as some malapropisms make perfect sense, just not the sense intended. (E.g. G.W.Bush's "And there is distrust in Washington ...I'll work hard to try to elevate it" or Shakespeare's "two notorious benefactors" in Measure for Measure.) Jubilee♫clipman 22:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Doubtful eggcorns

People have been saying tow the line instead of toe the line for decades, so this is really a folk etymology rather than a true eggcorn. Same with splashy instead of plashy: I'd never even heard of the word plashy before I read this article! Also, thefreedictionary.com (quoting Webester's 1913 edition) actually lists splashy as a synonym for plashy as do a great many others. Other dictionaries list splashing as a synonym. Finally, "plashy was not found in the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary". Many dictionaries that do list plashy seem to use Milton, Wordsworth and Keats for their examples or use old editions of classic dictionaries suggesting that the word is near-archaic. Suggest removing these examples. Jubilee♫clipman 23:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree that plashy is uncommon and therefore not the best example. (By the way, see discussion at /Archive 1#Plash?.) I would have no objection to removing the example if there is consensus to do so. I would define "consensus" in this case as "no contrary position expressed within, say, the next few weeks". (I'll leave tow/toe the line for future discussion.) Cnilep (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Possible example

I'm not sure if this is an example of eggcorn or malapropism or something in between, but some enterprising wikipedia editor might find the following specimen interesting:

What types of sexuals are there? ? - Yahoo! Answers

Nov 23, 2008 ... i know of: Homosexual and. Bisexual but im pretty sure theres more. ... Uhhh: * Asexuality - Individuals who do not experience sexual attraction ...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081123161741AAc6yBe --71.111.194.50 (talk) 09:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Haha Yahoo Answers is great. I don't see any connection to eggcorns though, and even if there was one, WP:OR would apply. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 11:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I guess maybe it's just a neologism, maybe that's the word I was looking for: "What types of sexuals are there? ?" Gotta love Yahoo Answers. --71.111.194.50 (talk) 07:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)