Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:03, 21 February 2007

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep/speedy keep.

Is nonation a form of Eggcorn? this is the process where "a napron" becomes "an apron". It has happend to many words and names in english, as I i understand it. DES 17:12, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd say it's borderline. The "a n___" -> "an _____" part works, I think, because it's a homophone that the speaker believes is the correct word, but that leaves you with the _____ part, which when the nonation occurs isn't recognized as a word yet. I can't think of an example of nonation that didn't end up coining a new word based on an old one without its leading "n", but if there was one then it might be a full-fledged eggcorn. — mendel ☎ 19:24, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Merge

From the article, "It is not a malapropism; Egg corn and acorn are homonyms at least in some pronunciations." Tom Harrison 13:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the merge suggestion seems to be sorely misinformed and is not justified by any comments here. I'd suggest removing it sooner rather than later because it's a terrible idea. Nohat 17:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it was a mistake, sorry, but I added it because both Eggcorn and Malapropism contain the exact same example ("for all intensive purposes"), which suggested to me that one is a subset of the other. –Tifego _{18:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)}

doggie-dog

It's a doggie-dog world? - The expression refers to a requirement for a self-centred nature in life, in order to survive. Hence one dog "eating" another. The expresson could be interchanged with "kill or be killed". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.201.144.71 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

sounds like the eggcorn variant of your example would be "killer bee killed". Rihk 23:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, so? Are you suggesting a change to the article? —Tamfang 02:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

— I suggest a small edit on "smashed potatoes" v "mashed potatoes": http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-smashed-potatoes.htm

Smashed potatoes have the skins on, mashed potatoes don't, but I'm wondering if it would make that any less of an eggcorn. I've never really come across anyone that didn't know or at least note the difference.

        I removed the smashed vs mashed potatoes entry, it could potentially be re-added with clarification that they are additionally different things, but I think for the case of an example it's better to simply omit it.

girl cheese?

Does any adult seriously think it's "girl cheese sandwiches"? What's interesting about eggcorns is that competent speakers of the languages make them. Jerry Kindall 09:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Jerry -- it's very difficult to see how "girl cheese sandwich" could be an eggcorn. And "visa versa" just seems like a phonetic spelling rather than an eggcorn. --estmere 07:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

coiner of the term

Mark Liberman was the first to attempt to define the concept of the eggcorn, but the name itself was later suggested by Geoff Pullum, another Language Log linguist. Speaking of Language Log, the article currently calls the site "a blog for linguists," but that actually seems a bit imprecise; it's a collective linguistics blog that seems to have laymen as its chief target audience. --estmere 07:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Unkempt

Could Unkept/unkempt be considered?

Contradiction with Mondegreen

It seems as though these two articles contradict because this one claims that they do not overlap. It sounds to me like they describe identical phenomena and only this article passingly restricts mondegreen to being in a song or poem. The other article has numerous examples that this article would restrict as an eggcorn. Either the two should be merged or it should be solidified as to the difference between them. Ƶ§œš¹ 00:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The two pages should not be merged; they refer to different phenomena. A mondegreen is extremely context-bound, and generally refers only to the use of a given word or phrase in a SPECIFIC song, poem, prayer, etc. By contrast, a word or phrase that's likely to be an eggcorn can be an eggcorn in any context. Only a very few of the examples in the Mondegreen article are potentially eggcornish -- eg, "sixty-five roses", and "cafe ole". None of the examples in the Eggcorn article are mondegreens. -- estmere 03:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand that distinction that this article is attempting to make, but the Mondegreen article does not restrict it that way. In addition, it seems to contradict the links at the bottom of the page that mark eggcorns as occurring exclusively in written discourse. Ƶ§œš¹ 06:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

It appeared to me that Estmere was not referring to the differences in discourse (written, spoken, song etc.). Estmere explained that mondegreens were context bound and eggcorns were not. There is no overlap between mondegreens and eggcorns, but that is not why. The explanation is below in my reply to Estmere. I do believe that what may be confusing you is the bad definition on mondegreen on the eggcorn page. The eggcorn article says that an eggcorn is not a mondegreen, because eggcorns are errors of misinterpretation of common speach and not "a phrase found in a song, poem or similar." While this is true, it doesn't really explain the difference or fully cover or explain mondegreens and a better line could be written. If you go to the mondegreen article however and read the actual explanation of what a mondegreen is, you'll see that they firmly exclude one another. Or you can just scroll down this page and view my other reply. TStein 11:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

"sixty-five roses" and "cafe ole" are not eggcornish at all. "Characteristic of the eggcorn is that the new phrase makes sense on some level." Cafe ole does not make sense for cafe au lait except in that they sound similar. The meaning is completely different--unless you often confuse milk and tequila. Look at the very first example in the eggcorn article: "old-timer's disease" for "Alzheimer's disease". A mondegreen is the mishearing of a word or phrase such as it acquires a new meaning. Whereas an eggcorn makes sense on some level. Both articles properly exclude the other, as they should. There is no contradiction or overlap in definition, and both definitions seem to be perfectly clear to me. TStein 10:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The notion that eggcorns "make sense" while mondegreens do not is sort of thrown out the window with the titling example. "Eggcorn" for "acorn" doesn't "make sense" any more than "excuse me now while I kiss this guy" (which, by the way, is more concrete and sensical than "...kiss the sky"). Naturally, my assertions of what does and do not make sense are subjective, but that makes dubious any professional attempt to do so as well. In addition, this assertion is completely unmentioned (and therefore unverified) in all of the links at the bottom. As it stands, the mondegreen article's definition of mondegreens also includes those of eggcorns. Ƶ§œš¹ 11:47, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

(The next 5 paragraphs are all by me -- Estmere.) Okay, this is getting awfully complex awfully fast. Let me say at the outset that though TStein and I seem to disagree on details, I suspect we're wholly in agreement on the most important point here: eggcorns and mondegreens are two very different things, and merging these pages would be a terrible idea.

I'm well aware of the idea that eggcorns should make sense on some level, but I purposely avoided that point in my original post because it's really hard to say that mondegreens never make sense. (And as I foresaw, Aeusoes1 immediately pounced on that in his response to TStein.) For instance, "There's a bathroom on the right" makes perfect sense by itself -- it's just terribly out of place in the song "Bad Moon on the Rise", where the real lyric is "There's a bad moon on the rise". But outside of that song, it's really unlikely that anyone would ever mistakenly substitute the former phrase for the latter; it's just not going to happen -- that mondegreen is intimately bound up with that song. The eggcorn "deformation of character," by contrast, isn't context-bound -- it can occur anywhere that a person might wish to write "defamation of character".

"Mondegreen" is often used to mean "a misheard lyric", and you can find mondegreen sites where the two phrases seem almost to be used as synonyms. But people also do occasionally use "mondegreen" in a more general sense, one that would seem to include the eggcorn phenomenon -- and the definition of "mondegreen" in the Mondegreen article reflects that broad range of usage. That's because "eggcorn" is a very new term, and until recently people didn't have a word more specific than "mondegreen" with which to address the eggcorn phenomenon. And the advent of "eggcorn" obviously isn't going to change overnight the way in which people use "mondegreen". And I don't think it's reasonable to tell the Mondegreen article people that they can't define their word in the broad, inclusive sense. Nevertheless, most of the examples in the Mondegreen article fit with the "misheard lyric/poem/prayer" model, but a few do seem pretty eggcornish.

The eggcorns article makes it very clear that it's paraphrasing linguist Mark Liberman at the point at which mondegreens are mentioned. Because he's a linguist, ML is using a very strict and limited sense of the word "mondegreen." He's ignoring the broader applications of "mondegreen" because he's trying to define something very precisely; and he is indeed using ONE OF THE SENSES of the word "mondegreen" correctly. Changing the article at that point would misrepresent Liberman's words. Would it be sufficient to insert a footnote there that would explain that not everyone might agree with Liberman's narrow definition of "mondegreen"?

"Eggcornish" is a term regularly employed by people on the discussion forum of the Eggcorns Database to mean "like an eggcorn, but probably not one" -- in the same way that "whitish" means "almost white, but not quite". "Sixty-five roses" and "cafe ole" are both indeed eggcornish, and both have been submitted to (and apparently rejected from) the Eggcorns Database. I carefully did not call them eggcorns; my point was that both are closer to a typical eggcorn than they are to a misheard song lyric -- "cafe ole" might occur anywhere someone meant to say "cafe au lait." --estmere 22:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you've just admitted that this article is a pure neologism. In a google scholar search as well as a search of JSTOR, I've found nothing regarding eggcorns. Even if it weren't a neologism, arguing that the mondegreen article can contradict eggcorn because people aren't caught up to speed isn't going to fly. The issue should at least be addressed (which it is not). But that is moot. I'm nominating this page for deletion. Ƶ§œš¹ 05:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I left a lengthy reply to you there with my arguement against deletion as well as a list of a few articles about eggcorns. You should have tried lexis-nexis. But, for people following the discussion here--this is a quickbreak down of eggcorn, malapropism, and mondegreen and why an eggcorn is neither a malapropism or a mondegreen.

Malaproposims have three defining features.

1. The new word must mean something different from the original word or phrase.

2. "The word used sounds similar to the word that was apparently meant or intended."

3. "The word used has a recognized meaning in the speaker's or writer's language."

"A mondegreen...is the mishearing...of a phrase in such a way that it acquires a new meaning.

Now, like malapropisms and mondegreens, eggcorns involve the substituion of a similar sounding word or phrase. That is where the similarity ends.

Examples

• Someone mentioned "there's a bathroom on the right" making sense. And it does. But it doesn't make sense for "there's a bad moon on the rise". The substitution is purely a mishearing. It is a mishearing and it "there's a bathroom on the right" is definitely a new meaning, so it is a mondegreen.
• Now, someone might say "cafe ole" when they mean "cafe au lait". But, again, the meaning of the two similar sounding phrases is completely different. This would be a malapropism except that it is a phrase and not a word. Malapropisms and mondegreens are incredibly similar--they are much closer in definition than eggcorn is to either of them.
• "old-timer's disease" for "Alzheimer's disease" is not a mondegreen. No new meaning has been acquired. It obviously isn't a malapropism--it's a phrase not a word, but even still, malapropisms also required a different meaning.
• "egg corn" fails being a malapropism on multiple grounds. It might pass on the word v. phrase thing, but it does not " a recognized meaning in the speaker's or writer's language." And, it isn't a mondegreen. This is a written example--there is no mishearing and no difference in meaning.

This isn't neologism--there is no previous definition that covers these sorts of blunders. Eggcorn is not a subset of a malapropism or mondegreen--it is simply similar. Put an external link at the bottom to both and leave it at that. Well, the article needs some editing too, but I'll work on that when I'm more awake.

TStein 11:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Blatantly obvious

Something I hear a lot is 'Blatantly obvious' instead of 'Patently obvious'. Is this an eggcorn? Chris 12:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't think so - it's just to different ways of saying "very obvious" (I'd actually argue the same over Butt-naked/Buck naked that's listed on the page).

An eggcorn is, from what I understand, essentially an attempt to make sense of an unfamiliar, often archaic phrase which you have only heard spoken. That's why you get things like "Beckon Call" instead of "Beck and Call" - the word "beck" doesn't appear anywhere else, so the hearer doesn't recognise it unless they already knows the phrase. Brickie 15:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

That puts the finger right on it. To me, an eggcorn is a clear signal that a person isn't well-read. Perhaps that would be a better way to approach defining the term. What makes eggcorns a relatively new phenomenon is how not-well-read it is now possible for a person to be while still being considered educated. More people have college degrees than ever before, yet even university graduates often admit to reading only one book a year -- or, frighteningly, none! Linguists are quite generous, I think, in not declaring some of these eggcorns signs of outright illiteracy (if not in one's language than certainly in one's culture), but descriptivists are non-judgmental to a fault. Jerry Kindall 10:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)