Sometimes solecisms can reveal linguistic ingenuity

https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2021/07/15/sometimes-solecisms-can-reveal-linguistic-ingenuity

by helsinkiandrew • 5 years ago

30 20 5 years ago

economist.com

euroclear• 5 years ago

https://outline.com/5qBRep

morpheos137• 5 years ago

More often they reveal poor intellect or hyperactive autocomplete.

nefitty• 5 years ago

There are different types of intelligence. I’m good at cooking but bad at math. Some people excel at physical endeavors but might have difficulties with language. “Poor intellect” means nothing at best. “Poor language skills” more effectively conveys what you seem to have intended to convey, although you did it without any source or backing argument.

bitwize• 5 years ago

Yeah, statistics says no. Cognitive aptitude in one area correlates very strongly with aptitude in other areas, leading the people who measure this stuff to conclude that there is pretty much one factor for general intelligence. The rest is training. You're bad at math because you're ill-practiced at it and/or you never found a way to overcome your math anxiety.

aynsof• 5 years ago

An 'eggcorn' that always makes my eye twitch is 'bunker down'.

To hunker down is to take a squat or crouch down on your heels. If I recall correctly, it comes from a similar root as 'haunches'.

'Bunker down' makes sense as an eggcorn, but I find it much less romantic somehow.

skmurphy2• 5 years ago

I learned it as "hone in" from hone meaning to sharpen or narrow (honing a blade). It seems to me that "home in" only makes sense if you are trying to return. If you seeking a new target hone in strikes me as more accurate. Apparently Webster disagrees.

_0ffh• 5 years ago

"home in" only makes sense if you are trying to return

Under that interpretation, homing missiles sound like a really bad idea.

skmurphy2• 5 years ago

Homing torpedoes and homing missiles sound more like boomerangs to me. But while a boomerang returns if you miss your target, it does not explode.

sebmellen2• 5 years ago

I don’t think I’ve heard a single person in my life say “home in on”, it’s always been “hone in on”.

DaveExeter• 5 years ago

I've never heard "hone in on"! If someone said it, I would assume they just mispronounced 'home'.

"hone in on" makes no sense!

sebmellen2• 5 years ago

Hmmm, curious. I suppose I may have just been chronically misunderstanding everyone my whole life. What a revelation!

To me, as suggested in the article, “honing” a sense or blade makes “hone in” seem more logical.

But I’m sure my parents both used “hone in” — Merriam Webster has an interesting definition and considers both correct: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/home-in-or-hon....

zimpenfish• 5 years ago

Conversely (UK English, many decades) I've never heard anyone says "hone in on" (entirely possible I've read it in prose and auto-translated it to "home in on" without noticing, mind.)

nealabq• 5 years ago

Years ago I read an article about Ray Kurzweil where the journalist referred to "a Ray processor". A mishearing of "Array processor" I suppose.

yesenadam• 5 years ago

Ones I've seen online recently: tenets referred to as tenants, Here here! instead of Hear, hear!, chock it up to instead of chalk it up to, chalk full instead of chock-full – this page explain it originally was choke-full, which makes more sense.

https://eggcorns.lascribe.net/english/945/chalked/

nescioquid• 5 years ago

I recall a meeting in which someone used the expression "flush out" and was corrected by someone else with "flesh out", which prompted a third to posit that the correct expression was "fletch out", claiming the true origin of the expression was in arrow-making. Would have been better delivered while leaving the meeting, making for a "Parthian shot".

dekhn• 5 years ago

flush out is what you to birds in a bush, flesh out is what you do to the skeleton of an idea, and fletch out isn't a thing.

Sometimes solecisms can reveal linguistic ingenuity

Related Stories