Discussions about eggcorns and related topics
You are not logged in.
Registrations are temporarily closed as we're receiving a steady stream of registration spam.
Anyone who wishes to register, please email me at chris dot waigl at gmail dot com with the desired username and a valid email address, and I will register you manually.
Thanks for your understanding.
Chris -- 2011-03-08
If ever there was a case demanding instant skepticism, this might be it. But look these over. The use of “clothes” for the eyes, for example, especially in the form of “eyes clothed” and “her eyes were clothes”, has an inescapable logic. OK, yes, WTF typos might explain some, but I think not all, of the instances that can be found out there.
People have a much harder time spelling “clothes” correctly than “close” so you would think the substitution would be uncommon. I wonder if an errant spellchecker had much to do with those reshapings. Anyway, it is fanciful to think that “clothes” might have been intended as part of an imagery shift. It has an almost romantic appeal to it.