Discussions about eggcorns and related topics
You are not logged in.
Registrations were closed for a long time because of forum spam, but I have re-opened them on a trial basis.
The forum administrator (chris dot waigl at gmail dot com) 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 -- 2015-05-30
This was in the end essay of the November 2007 Fine Home Building
This is a wonderful thing. But, if you look in the Google Search part of this web site, somebody wrote it here (no comments) in March 2007. I do not understand how the Search Function here works. You Eggcorn Gods, should we always check our ideas in that Google Search window? But it only seems to Google this site? Or? Need direction.
I don’t think anyone fully understands how our search engines work—or don’t work. But two things….
First, the basics are fairly clear. The Search engine that has a button above the forum page is really good for finding things in forum posts—especially if you enter just one word (say, “delusion”). By contrast, the Google search engine on the home page of the Database supposedly searches the whole site (and only the site, unless you give it different directions), but it’s a bit dodgier about returning hits for forum posts. On the other hand, it does return hits for the old comments list that was in place before the forum was established in the Fall of 2005. So if you’re worried that Ken Lakritz may already have had your idea back in March of 2005 (and you should be), that’s the place to go.
Second, in this case all my qualifications above prove unnecessary. I put “optical delusion” into both search engines, and in both cases I instantly found the post Tom was talking about. Not a problem. Sometimes just trying it turns out to be a lot quicker than worrying about it.
The search engine on this website only seems to work when you enter a single word; in this case “delusion”...
“Optical delusion,” for “optical illusion.” by COsborne Contribute! 0 2007-03-26 14:31:32 by COsborne
Isn’t this usage just a case of modifying the prefix—often intentionally?
Yesterday, I actually got the hits in question when I put “optical delusion” (both words) into the search engine on this page. I tried it again just now with the same results. I can’t explain it, but it worked without a hitch. And just to be sure, I entered “delusion” by itself, and got a slightly larger range of results. So putting in two words does sometimes work. Obviously, we need to experiment more and see if we can define the patterns more closely.