Interesting questions. Do they pronounce “blasé”
with two syllables or as if it has a silent e? The chock/chalk confusion may
arise from a sound change, the a/aw merger that is found in a band about 100
miles north to south from about Pittsburg west to the Mississippi and then
everywhere west of the Mississippi north of a line from about St. Louis to El
Paso. These speakers pronounce “cot” and “caught” with
the same vowels, which, depending on area, may be either both /a/ or both /aw/.
There was until recently a store in here in
Another widely used form of a different
sort is “hone in on” for “home in on”. The Merriam
Webster Dictionary of English Usage dates this usage to 1978, citing it in a primary
campaign speech by George H. W. Bush. I have since found it in such places as
the New York Times Magazine. I still reject it in student writing, which is, I
fear, every bit as pedantic and tendentious as rejecting “most unique”.
Herb
From:
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006
8:44 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Question: Language change
and malapropism
The discussion of the broadening of the
meaning of 'unique' is interesting, but I see a different problem that
I might call widespread malapropism.
My students often create terms or use
them as malapropisms--and these may be derived from rap music or these may have
their roots in Microsoft Word's spell-checker. Does anyone else know anything
more about this?
One frequently occurring example is the
word 'blase' to mean "bla-bla-bla" or 'yadayadayada". My
students will actually say: "blase blase blase" thinking that it is
equivalent to these other terms. So when this phrase enters widespread
use, can we say that the meaning of 'blase' has altered? (even though
most students who use it in this context do not know that they have altered a
meaning; they think they have learned a new word.)
The other phenomenon has to do with what
we might call homonyms, such as:
'chock it up to experience'
"she was a pre-madonna"
While these examples are clearly
homonyms--and you think that the person had heard the phrase and has just spelled
it incorrectly, perhaps with the aid of a spell-checker--they really do express
concepts that are fundamentally different from the ones they mimic.
Chalking it up to experience is different
than chocking it up (or chucking it up) to experience.
A prima donna is a different concept than
a pre-Madonna, even though they both involve females.
Any thoughts?
Linda DiDesidero