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
The metaphorical shift here would seem to be from a tiny spark you can barely see to an odor you can barely smell – and that works pretty well for the first citation below. This could be a simple misspelling; “scintilla†and “scentilla†would have identical pronunciations for those of us with the pin/pen merger. But I would think “scent†is so common and distinctive that it’s gotta be drawing attention to itself for those using the reshaping. This is rare – only 14 ughits. Examples:
These five percent run around saying that a bourbon has “hints of vanilla, caramel, Provence-grown thyme, and a scentilla of Iranian dates from the 1997 harvestâ€, and the joke is that they probably really can taste these things.
http://stoneunhinged.wordpress.com/2006/02/20/
I dare you to travel to ANY country with an Islamic Theocracy and find a single one of these “Muslim chic” women in public that can wear that burqua or hijab and have even a scentilla of sex appeal.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives … usted.html
Sometimes Lisa, you open your mouth to speak not having a scentilla of understanding regarding what you say.
http://strelzbacktalk.proboards19.com/i … 100&page=3
Hey! My new spellchecker program doesn’t flag “gotta.†I can’t decide whether or not that’s good.
[Edit: My Google numbers are wrong. There’s an air freshener called “Scentilla”; I was using “a scentilla” to avoid citations of the brand, but I forgot I’d limited the search in that way. “Scentilla” gets 568/128 r/ughits, but most of those aren’t the target reshaping.]
Last edited by patschwieterman (2008-08-21 03:50:34)
Offline
Any possibility the “cent” inside “scentilla” is influencing this?
But “scent” itself isn’t such a bad imagery switch—the things that create scents are pretty darned small, yes?
And dates & sex appeal have odiferous (isn’t that a great word?) connections.
Offline
Pat favors us with yet another scentillating contribution.
(1.5K, but many of them are purposeful. Still, some, e.g.
a scentillating effect is produced when these shades are used with electric light bulbs
www.wikipatents.com/gb/179224.html
are probably for real.)
*If the human mind were simple enough for us to understand,
we would be too simple-minded to understand it* .
Offline
I think Pat is on the right track with “an odor you can barely smell.” That clearly works for the first two citations, and from there it’s just a slight semantic expansion to “a scintilla of proof” etc.
I find this oddly reminiscent of “look warm << luke warm” in its synaesthesia. In that case, barely warm is a “look”; in this case, barely perceptible is a “scent.”
http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/forum/view … hp?id=2758
And in light of what I said in that thread, I should add that I’m somewhat more convinced of the eggcornicity of scentilla than I was of look warm. Moreover, the existence of the former strengthens my confidence in the latter.
Offline