logophile

eggcorn of the day #4

Fri, 10 Sep 2010 22:31:35 -0400

Observed:

“… but even tropical force winds can wreck havoc.”

Here, “wreck havoc” is an eggcorn of “wreak havoc.” As the entry in the Eggcorn Database suggests, this non-homophonic substitution likely began with persons reading the phrase, not hearing it spoken.

In context of the original phrase, the verb “to wreak” signifies “To cause or effect (harm, damage, etc.)” (OED 8b.)

“Havoc,” the noun being brought into effect, means:

2. Devastation, destruction; esp. in phr. to make havoc, play havoc (freq. const. with), in which the earlier sense of spoliation or plunder has gradually passed into that of destructive devastation. Also in weakened sense: confusion and disorder, disarray. The phrases to work havoc, create havoc are also common. (OED)

Thus, the eggcorn: “to wreck havoc” is a tautology.

A sort of PSA: Proper usage is important, but one should never...

Sun, 22 Aug 2010 18:36:18 -0400

A sort of PSA: Proper usage is important, but one should never stake anyone’s life on it.

Usage note #3: Flagrant word substitution or the shocking truth...

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:07:21 -0400

Usage note #3: Flagrant word substitution or the shocking truth about other diet programs? You decide.

usage note #2

Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:29:53 -0400

“secession” vs. “cessation”

Observed:

“In these cases [the interveners] would be more interested in continuation, rather than secession, of hostilities, and the longer peace deals last the less successful their actions would actually be.”

The OED defines “secession” as:

1. a. The action or an act of going away from one’s accustomed neighbourhood, or of retiring from public view; the condition of living remote from one’s former home, or retired from public view; retirement. Obs.

3. a. The action of seceding or formally withdrawing from an alliance, a federation, a political or religious organization, or the like. Hence, a body of seceders.

Thus, the only way we might conceive of a “secession of hostilities” would be to imagine the ongoing conflict suddenly picking up shop and moving as a unit to an entirely different location. As this is an unlikely possibility, let us see if “cessation” makes any more sense. According to the OED, “cessation” means:

1. Ceasing, discontinuance, stoppage; either permanent or temporary.

b. Cessation of or from arms: suspension of hostilities; armistice, truce.

And we have a winner: the author of the example sentence wishes us to understand that ending a conflict — cessation of hostilities — is not necessarily a marker of success if the intervening state is uninterested in peace.

eggcorn of the day #3

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:59:00 -0400

Observed:

“You are in touch with your inner-self, feelings, and deep-seeded emotions, and love to express them with music and art.”

In this sentence, “deep-seeded emotions” is an eggcorn of “deep-seated emotions.”

The Eggcorn Database documents this substitution, citing Mark Liberman of the Language Log:

And in terms of the current ordinary-language meaning of the words involved, “deep-seeded ignorance” makes sense, while “deep-seated ignorance” doesn’t. Ignorance can be planted deep and thus have deep metaphorical roots, but deep-seated ignorance would have to be ignorance cut with a lot of room in the crotch, or maybe ignorance sitting in a badly-designed armchair.

The Eggcorn Database further notes, “for most speakers, the verb seed will be common in the sense relating to sports competitions, leading to top-seeded.”

However, if one traces the origin of the term “deep-seated,” we find that it does indeed make sense. The OED offers this as one definition for the noun “seat”:

14. a. The thing (esp. the organ or part of the body) in which a particular power, faculty, function or quality ‘resides’; the locality of a disease, sensation, or the like.
b. Similarly, of the soul or its parts.

This definition of “seat” leads us to understand that “deep-seated” emotions would be those harbored in the innermost parts of one’s being, inside one’s core self.

eggcorn of the day #2

Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:47:00 -0400

Although this one may be merely the result of sloppy typing coupled with overzealous spellchecker usage, I prefer to think of it as an eggcorn.

Observed:

“[L]ess than a year later he found his readers also wanted to learn more about Photoshop so launched a new blog for that and with in a couple years he now has over a dozen blog’s earning up woods of a million dollars a year.”

This substitution of “up woods” for “upwards,” if a true eggcorn, gives us the delightful image of veritable forests of money springing up as a result of the storied gentleman’s entrepreneurship.

——

This is not intended to be a grammar blog, so I am trying to avoid lengthy commentary on the subject. (Certainly, I am the first to admit my own guilt in expending commas frivolously.) However, I must note that the superfluous, nay, downright abusive largesse of apostrophes now littered upon the internet’s fair shores is intolerable.

dialect/usage note #1

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:45:00 -0400

might could

Observed:

“[I]f anyone’s doing a caravan from around this area, we might could join up.”

“[Chris] thinks he might could use a jam session fairly soon.”

Growing up in the Southwestern United States, I had never heard the “might could” construction until I moved to the South a few years ago. Depending on the context, this double modal may be used to communicate the meanings: “might be able to”; “probably could”; “possibly could.”

This construction (along with similarly rare double modals such as “used to could” and “ought to should”) appears to originate in Scots, the Germanic (not Gaelic) language in Scotland and Ulster, e.g. “A micht coud come the morn (I may be able to come tomorrow).” (Now I’m regretting the fact that all my George McDonald books are across the country because I’d like to hunt for more such gems!)

word of the day #1

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:44:00 -0400

procrustean, Procrustean (adj.)

This is a word much beloved by political scientists, often used to criticize one another for too-rigid theoretical (or even epistemological) frameworks.

The OED defines “Procrustean” as “resembling the practices of Procrustes […]; (hence) enforcing uniformity or conformity without regard to natural variation or individuality,” and notes its use dating back to the mid-17th century.

But who was this Procrustes, thus immortalized? Found in Greek mythology, Procrustes was a rather clever villain, whose methods of hospitality led to the unfortunate end of unwary travelers — until he received his comeuppance at the hands of the hero Theseus. Bulfinch’s Mythology (1880) relates the tale as follows:

As the roads were infested with robbers, [Theseus’] grandfather pressed him earnestly to take the shorter and safer way to his father’s country—by sea; but the youth, feeling in himself the spirit and the soul of a hero, and eager to signalize himself like Hercules, with whose fame all Greece then rang, by destroying the evil-doers and monsters that oppressed the country, determined on the more perilous and adventurous journey by land.
[…]

Several similar contests with the petty tyrants and marauders of the country followed, in all of which Theseus was victorious. One of these evil-doers was called Procrustes, or the Stretcher. He had an iron bedstead, on which he used to tie all travellers who fell into his hands. If they were shorter than the bed, he stretched their limbs to make them fit it; if they were longer than the bed, he lopped off a portion. Theseus served him as he had served others.

eggcorn of the day #1

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:42:00 -0400

Observed:

“If you think a proposal on facebook is sufficient, you got another thing coming!”

“[to have] another thing coming” is an eggcorn of the colloquial phrase “to have another think coming.” The earliest usage cited by the OED is an entry in Vol. XII (1937) of the journal American Speech, in which “to have another think coming” communicates the idea “of some one’s making a mistake” (italics in original) — having thought something, a person will be proven wrong by reality and forced to rethink the previously formed conclusions or expectations (“have another think”).