Help on an urbanish legend?
Mar. 15th, 2005 03:42 amI bought a book of Double Crostics from a going-out-of-business Buck-a-Book today, so I paid something like seventy-five cents for it, and I figured, sure, why not? So one of the quotes in it is from Richard Lederer's Crazy English:
For a while now I've disliked Richard Lederer; I find him to be full of recycled jokes, bland observations, and awe for the most mundane aspects of English (while ignoring the truly awesome parts). For instance, I think the "why do we drive on a parkway but park on a driveway" observation is his--though perhaps he stole it from George Carlin, perhaps Carlin stole it from him, perhaps Carlin never said it. I frankly find the answer a much more interesting fact about English than the random "ahaha" observation.
The quote above, though, reminds me of some of the things the folks at LanguageLog often point out about other language myths, such as a certain amount of superiority at the expense of foreigners (compare how quaint those Esquimo must be for their nine billion names of snow).
Some vague Googling turned up any number of people claiming that they'd heard of someone with the name, in classic "no this really happened to a friend of a friend" urban legend fashion. And thus I ask: does anyone out there, librarian or amateur researcher or language maven or idle reader, have any evidence at all that the anecdote related by Lederer is true?
Sound and meaning...work upon us in ways that ear and mind alone cannot always analyze. Consider the foreign couple who decided to name their first daughter with the most beautiful English word they had ever heard. They named the child "Diarrhea."
For a while now I've disliked Richard Lederer; I find him to be full of recycled jokes, bland observations, and awe for the most mundane aspects of English (while ignoring the truly awesome parts). For instance, I think the "why do we drive on a parkway but park on a driveway" observation is his--though perhaps he stole it from George Carlin, perhaps Carlin stole it from him, perhaps Carlin never said it. I frankly find the answer a much more interesting fact about English than the random "ahaha" observation.
The quote above, though, reminds me of some of the things the folks at LanguageLog often point out about other language myths, such as a certain amount of superiority at the expense of foreigners (compare how quaint those Esquimo must be for their nine billion names of snow).
Some vague Googling turned up any number of people claiming that they'd heard of someone with the name, in classic "no this really happened to a friend of a friend" urban legend fashion. And thus I ask: does anyone out there, librarian or amateur researcher or language maven or idle reader, have any evidence at all that the anecdote related by Lederer is true?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-15 11:47 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-15 01:49 pm (UTC)So why does "park" have those two meanings, anyway? Did people used to park their carriages in the park? Why did someone come up with "parking lot" instead of just using "car park"?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-16 05:17 am (UTC)Feh Mal eee
Date: 2005-03-15 05:09 pm (UTC)Certainly possible that a similar situation happened with one of the arm tags denoting a bowel problem.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-15 05:27 pm (UTC)I may be spelling it incorrectly, but you heard it right. Supa-porn. Porn. Prom. Lick it.
It probably means pretty girl girl with nice hair or something in its original language.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-15 06:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-15 05:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-15 07:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-16 04:43 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-16 04:59 am (UTC)Californians are fundamentally insanethe mother presumably knew what the words meant and named her children that anyway. That takes away the condescending-toward-foreigners aspect of the story--but it also weakens Lederer's point a little, insofar as it no longer illustrates that someone might use a word as a name without even knowing what it means.(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-16 08:48 pm (UTC)The notion that you'd pull a few syllables out of the stream of uncomprehended speech, and pronounce them well enough to be recognized, and that it would happen to be a word, seems wildly unlikely. The fact that it would end up being a word that's embarrassing to name a child is unlikelier still. There are plenty of other things I've seen Lederer publish that are obviously made up. He clearly thinks the important thing is whether the story is amusing, not whether it's true.
Still, as fake linguists go, he's not nearly as annoying as Safire.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-16 09:28 pm (UTC)Can you think offhand what "obviously made up" things Lederer has published? It'd be handy to have a few such data points for when his name comes up.