Eggcorn Forum

Discussions about eggcorns and related topics

You are not logged in.


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 2020-01-27 19:45:02

From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2725

Columbia Journalism Review

Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.



#2 2020-01-28 12:47:02

From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2384

Re: Columbia Journalism Review

Interesting read. I disagreed with this:

Almost by definition, an eggcorn has to be written; can you really tell the difference if someone says “for all intensive purposes” or “for all intents and purposes”? And most eggcorns probably begin as something misheard, and then typed as the hearer believes them to be rendered.

Yes, if you listen carefully, or catch yourself saying it, you can tell the difference. And as we have mentioned in many posts, sometimes the eggcorning takes place where the spelling is identical, and only the differing pronunciation clues you in to the change in meaning. Other times (as in the suit < suite case) the eggcorning probably takes place because the spelling is so similar, given that the pronunciations are so diverse as to make a connection on that side of things implausible.
Ken’s post today on lent < leant is yet another type. Here the pronunciations are identical (at least for me they are), so there is no mishearing involved, but there is misanalysis which is, as in the cases the author is reacting to, revealed by the difference in spelling. In a language with a more reasonable spelling system, they are less likely to even be detected.

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2020-01-28 15:07:22)

*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 .)



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