This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ballchef (talk | contribs) at 23:49, 12 December 2012 (→Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 23:49, 12 December 2012 by Ballchef (talk | contribs) (→Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Linguistics Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep/speedy keep. |
 Archives | ||||||
|
||||||
Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here
This topic is particularly necessary to clarify the relatively new topic of eggcorns.
- rot iron, or even more confusingly, rod iron, instead of wrought iron<ref>"Clearing the confusion over wrought iron," Reprinted from Ornamental & Miscellaneous Metal Fabricator, November/December 1993, p. 38. http://www.artmetal.com/project/NOMMA/WROUGHT.HTM</ref>
- Added by User:Cynthisa on 31 December 2011 with the edit summary "Rot/wrought iron". Cnilep (talk) 06:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think it's a nice example, as wright/wrought is pretty rare in contemporary English, and such specialized or archaic words are ripe for eggcorning. In agreement SherpaSam's comment, below, I don't think we need to comment on "more confusing" or less confusing examples, though. I'm also not convinced that it's necessarily a better example than "praying mantis", which Cynthisa removed. The two are probably equally good. Cnilep (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- Added by User:Cynthisa on 31 December 2011 with the edit summary "Rot/wrought iron". Cnilep (talk) 06:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- chester drawers instead of chest of drawers <ref>{{cite web |url=http://chattanooga.craigslist.org/fuo/2834567396.html }}</ref>
- Added by IP user 184.174.140.46 11 February 2012 with no edit summary. Cnilep (talk) 03:33, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- prof-elastic instead of prophylactic I've heard my brother, a H.S. dropout from Brooklyn, NY, make this mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.13.165.110 (talk) 21:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- duck tape instead of duct tape, and could of instead of could have. I think these are both more classic and widespread than some of the examples currently listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.59.71.159 (talk) 03:57, 17 February 2012
- not eggcorns because why would could of or duck tape make “sense”? Jikybebna (talk) 12:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- Duck tape had better make sense because it's the correct version. It's made with cotton duck. Duct tape is the eggcorn (and in this sense possibly the best example thereof, as it's so ubiquitous!). "Could of" is gramatically incorrect under all circumstances, though that doesn't specifically disqualify it. However, it's a simple malapropism.71.198.11.186 (talk) 04:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have removed a section, "Which is the eggcorn?", created by User:Paulmlieberman discussing duck/duct tape. If there is no consensus yet on whether to add it as an example, I see no reason to add it as a section. Contrary opinions are of course welcome. Cnilep (talk) 00:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- I thought it was worth its own section because it illustrates a (probably rare) situation in which a term was correct (duck tape) but is now thought to be an eggcorn for the currently common term (duct tape). Neither is actually an eggcorn; the referent has changed: the primary characteristic that gave duck tape its name (that it was made from duck cloth) is no longer operant. Though modern duct tape (which is not made from duck cloth) is not the best product for sealing air ducts, it worked well enough to save the lives of the Apollo 13 astronauts. User:Paulmlieberman (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, Cnilep, I think you are being too strict. The topic is probably of greater general interest than the majority of other examples that remain in the article. With adequate clarification of which came first, it will enhance the reader's experience. Hertz1888 (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- Which came first, the duck or the eggcorn? Paulmlieberman (talk) 14:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, Cnilep, I think you are being too strict. The topic is probably of greater general interest than the majority of other examples that remain in the article. With adequate clarification of which came first, it will enhance the reader's experience. Hertz1888 (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- I thought it was worth its own section because it illustrates a (probably rare) situation in which a term was correct (duck tape) but is now thought to be an eggcorn for the currently common term (duct tape). Neither is actually an eggcorn; the referent has changed: the primary characteristic that gave duck tape its name (that it was made from duck cloth) is no longer operant. Though modern duct tape (which is not made from duck cloth) is not the best product for sealing air ducts, it worked well enough to save the lives of the Apollo 13 astronauts. User:Paulmlieberman (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have removed a section, "Which is the eggcorn?", created by User:Paulmlieberman discussing duck/duct tape. If there is no consensus yet on whether to add it as an example, I see no reason to add it as a section. Contrary opinions are of course welcome. Cnilep (talk) 00:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Duck tape had better make sense because it's the correct version. It's made with cotton duck. Duct tape is the eggcorn (and in this sense possibly the best example thereof, as it's so ubiquitous!). "Could of" is gramatically incorrect under all circumstances, though that doesn't specifically disqualify it. However, it's a simple malapropism.71.198.11.186 (talk) 04:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- not eggcorns because why would could of or duck tape make “sense”? Jikybebna (talk) 12:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- paper mash-ey instead of papier-mâché
- Added by User:Coin945 on 24 March 2012 with no edit summary. Cnilep (talk) 06:07, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
- "McCaw" for "macaw" 98.177.248.112 (talk) 08:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Here, here for hear, hear Jikybebna (talk) 10:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Today I read sugar code for sugar coat.Jikybebna (talk) 08:36, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Isles when talking about isles in a shop. Maybe to homophonic for eggcorn? Jikybebna (talk) 12:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Please see /Archive_4#Proposal_to_radically_reduce_the_number_of_examples for why adding more examples might not be a good idea. Adrian J. Hunter 15:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- agree, but a) a long list of examples here would make it easier to find the very best for the short list in the article, and b) maybe there in the future could be a separate page list of eggcorns. Jikybebna (talk) 08:36, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure whether (b) would satisfy notability, but fair point on (a). My comment was a general one to anyone posting here. Adrian J. Hunter 14:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- "Trail of thought" for "train of thought"--Coin945 (talk) 12:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- nerve-wrecking instead of nerve-racking<ref>http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-egg3.htm</ref> Submitted from IP 184.4.221.85 on 2 July 2012. Moved here by Cnilep (talk) 05:32, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- damp squid instead of damp squib
- make due instead of make do. This one occurs mostly in American English as far as I can tell and cannot occur in British English due to the differing pronunciations of 'do' and 'due'. This makes it a glaringly obvious error to a British English speaker instead of a more subtle error for an American English speaker. eyeball226 (talk) 14:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
- crawlfish instead of crawfish" 71.198.11.186 (talk) 04:49, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- Mythconception instead of misconception — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.151.49 (talk) 09:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
- purgery instead of perjury. This is so common that the Misplaced Pages page for Purgery redirects to Perjury. Also see the Wiktionary page --Harikawashi (talk) 08:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- sneak peak instead of sneak peek — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.17.213.218 (talk) 01:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- "cup of chino" instead of "cappuccino" - this is one I often heard old folks say when I worked at a cafe Ballchef (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- "in the spirit of the moment" instead of the two listed already Ballchef (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Odd / Incorrect / Irrelevant wording in Example
The Wrought Iron example says "rot iron, or even more confusingly, rod iron, instead of wrought iron" I don't disagree with the terms Rod iron and Rot iron but, as Wrought Iron is commonly found in long thin forms, there is nothing particularly confusing about Rod Iron Rot Iron, on the other hand is confusing, as wrought iron is particularly known for it's resistance to rust (aka Rot). SherpaSam (talk) 03:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- The example was apparently added without being discussed first. That's perfectly in keeping with Misplaced Pages's BE BOLD policy, but contrary to a consensus among several editors (including me) to limit new or changed examples on this page. I've restored "praying mantis" and moved rot/rod iron to the upper section of this talk page. Cnilep (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Add a List instead of / in addition to the examples
Having the examples is nice, but I also think a list of these would be welcome, especially for people wondering which form is the correct form of a word. --Harikawashi (talk) 08:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- There are currently links to two lists of eggcorns in the External links section. A new stand alone list on Misplaced Pages might be created subject to policies on notability and verifiability, as well as the standards described at Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists. Cnilep (talk) 02:10, 13 October 2012 (UTC)