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 2008-11-17 21:45:57

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2752
Website

rattle-tat-tat

My car has a few rattle-tat-tats.

The instrumentation combines the swooning strings, the angry, throttling guitars , and the Farisfa organs going into hard synths, the rattle-tat-tat drums,

Now my 2000 LS with 26300 miles is making a “CLUNK” Rattle-Tat-Tat at low speeds going over any road imperfection

“Well, Boss,” Danny started his staccato rattle-tat-tat analysis. “I count 24 pictures in total.

“Rattle-tat-tat, smack, boom — take that. Your dead”, he would guttural out. Billy now jumped on top of the bed pointing his imaginary machine gun

The standard form is, of course, “rat-a-tat-tat”—it’s standardness reflected in 140K reported ghits vs. a couple of dozen for the rattle variant. One could argue that they have to be etymologically related, I suppose, though I wouldn’t easily have thought of them as employing the same morpheme, and I am more aware than most that words like ratt-le are bimorphemic. To me the imagery does shift, away from a clear four-notes-in-three-beats (two eighths followed by two quarter notes) to an unspecified number of fast notes followed by two slow ones.

Btw, isn’t the verb “to guttural (out)” a nice one? = Speak out in a mutteral voice?


*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

 

#2 2008-11-19 10:06:32

Peter Forster
Eggcornista
From: UK
Registered: 2006-09-06
Posts: 1258

Re: rattle-tat-tat

I wonder whether there might be something eggcornish in ‘gutteral’, for the throaty gurgling of rain-filled gutters isn’t too far from the gargling throatiness of guttural speech.
Remembering the AmEnglish ‘tidbit’ or almost equally popular ‘tidbid’, I looked for ‘raddle tad tad’ but without success. “Rad a tad tad’ was there though, as was ‘tid for tad’ and ‘tell tale tid.’ I used to believe the usage was the result of puritanical horror at the word ‘tit’ but now I’m not so sure. ‘No shid’ for example yields 81 ughits.

Offline

 

#3 2008-11-25 05:54:56

Dixon Wragg
Eggcornista
From: Cotati, California
Registered: 2008-07-04
Posts: 1375

Re: rattle-tat-tat

DavidTuggy wrote:

One could argue that they have to be etymologically related, I suppose…

My dictionary (New Oxford American Dictionary) says that etymologically both “rattle” and “rat-a-tat” (or “rat-a-tat-tat”) are imitative words and, since they’re imitating similar sounds, it perhaps could be argued that this etymological similarity militates against eggcornicity.

To me the imagery does shift, away from a clear four-notes-in-three-beats (two eighths followed by two quarter notes) to an unspecified number of fast notes followed by two slow ones.

I don’t get this at all, David. Assuming we use the more standard “rat-a-tat-tat” rather than the shorter “rat-a-tat”, I see no difference between that and “rattle-tat-tat” in terms of number of syllables, accents, or rhythm. Both are two eighths followed by two quarter notes, aren’t they?

Dixon, rattling on…

Offline

 

#4 2008-11-25 09:53:37

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2752
Website

Re: rattle-tat-tat

Dixon Wragg wrote:

I don’t get this at all, David. Assuming we use the more standard “rat-a-tat-tat” rather than the shorter “rat-a-tat”, I see no difference between that and “rattle-tat-tat” in terms of number of syllables, accents, or rhythm. Both are two eighths followed by two quarter notes, aren’t they?

I’m not talking (directly) about the phonological shape of these, but the meaning. For me “rat-a-tat-tat” is quite strictly iconic: it sounds like and also means two eighths followed by two quarter notes. “rattle-tat-tat” also sounds like that, but to me it means a flurry of notes followed by two quarter notes. Two eighth notes don’t easily count as a rattle, for me.


*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

 

#5 2008-11-25 16:03:28

Dixon Wragg
Eggcornista
From: Cotati, California
Registered: 2008-07-04
Posts: 1375

Re: rattle-tat-tat

DavidTuggy wrote:

I’m not talking (directly) about the phonological shape of these, but the meaning. For me “rat-a-tat-tat” is quite strictly iconic: it sounds like and also means two eighths followed by two quarter notes. “rattle-tat-tat” also sounds like that, but to me it means a flurry of notes followed by two quarter notes. Two eighth notes don’t easily count as a rattle, for me.

Ohhhh, I get it. And it makes sense.

Dixon

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