Eggcorn Forum

Discussions about eggcorns and related topics

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Registrations are currently closed because of a technical problem. Please send email to if you wish to register.

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

#1 2010-04-20 10:30:04

kem
Eggcornista
From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2853

poohbah << poohpooh

This weekend I heard a colleague say that someone’s action was poohbahed by another.

The person meant to say, I’m sure, that the object of scorn was pooh-poohed. The expression “pooh-pooh” is a reduplicative of “pooh,” which is onomatopoetical for the sound of derision made by puffing out the lips and letting the air out with a silent plosive. It is not, as some seem to think, borrowed from the child’s word for excrement–on the contrary, “poo” may in fact come from “pooh” (See our earlier discussion of “poo-poo/pooh-pooh” for more on the confusion of these two terms).

When Gilbert penned the libretto for The Mikado, he gave one of the haughty characters, the Lord-High-Everything-Else who was “born sneering,” the tendentious name “Pooh-bah” (View members of the D’Oyly Carte Opera Company doing Pooh-bah’s entrance and aria.). Gilbert probably confected his odd name out of a pair of English derision interjections.

Saying someone was “pooh-bahed,” then, would constitute an eggcorn. Both the verb/interjection “pooh-pooh” and the noun-turned-verb “pooh-bah” share the semantics of extreme haughtiness, but they arrive at the shared semantics via slightly different etymological pathways.

See other examples of this error here and here.


Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.

Offline

 

#2 2010-04-20 12:26:44

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

Re: poohbah << poohpooh

Cool find, and excellent write-up.
.
One quibble: the sound of a silent plosive is nothing. The plosive in this case is voiceless but not soundless; the puff of the aspiration when the plosive is released is what we hear. (Consonants in general, even voiced ones, and particularly plosives [=stops], are heard much more through their effects on neighboring vowels or aspirations than for themselves.)

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2010-04-20 12:58:43)


*If the human mind were simple enough for us to understand,
we would be too simple-minded to understand it* .

(Possible Corollary: it is, and we are .)

Offline

 

#3 2010-04-20 19:09:46

kem
Eggcornista
From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2853

Re: poohbah << poohpooh

the sound of a silent plosive is nothing

Indeed. Caught in the act by a credentialed linguist.


Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
PunBB is © 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson
Individual posters retain the copyright to their posts.

RSS feeds: active topicsall new posts