Discussions about eggcorns and related topics
You are not logged in.
Registrations are currently closed because of a technical problem. Please send email to
The forum administrator reserves the right to request users to plausibly demonstrate that they are real people with an interest in the topic of eggcorns. Otherwise they may be removed with no further justification. Likewise, accounts that have not been used for posting may be removed.
Thanks for your understanding.
Chris -- 2018-04-11
I heard someone use the expression ‘the devil take the hindmost’ but the latter word seemed to have three syllables – ‘the devil take the high-and-most.’ Most what? If we allow for an implicit ellipsis it makes some kind of sense, especially if the utterer was one of the low and least, but it remains oddly unsatisfactory. Perhaps it might qualify as an eggco.
... distributor of bibles, on Monday was a tough business man and a hard bargainer whose creed was “each for himself the devil take the high and mostâ€. ...
And it’s not a devil take the high and most Wild West kind of economy. Is there some sense of equitability in it? Some structures that protect, ...
Only two ghits but I’m quite fond of the rarities. Come to think of it, why do we chase high numbers to establish eggcornicity when that way lies mainstream usage/folk etymology? Not only could we welcome low numbers but even a single genuine example should surely be cherished?
Offline
Yes, a single genuine example should be cherished. But if something is an eggcorn it must be standard for someone, and the the best indication of standardness is repeated usage. Repeat hits in the same document are a lot better than lots of hits. The problem with a nonce citation is that it is more susceptible to being some other kind of randomish error or purposeful wordplay and less reasonable to suppose that it is a well-established eggcorn.
Last edited by DavidTuggy (2008-11-30 20:06:22)
*If the human mind were simple enough for us to understand,
we would be too simple-minded to understand it* .
Offline
You are right, Peter, we do sometimes fall into the trap of treating all sources as equal. I think that is one of the reasons we have a fixations on numbers-if we get enough examples, we can be reasonably certain that at least some will fit the eggcorn bill. But when we can’t get the numbers, we need to look carefully at the sources. One good example from an impeccable source could mean as much as a hundred dubious examples.
Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.
Offline