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 2009-01-08 14:37:52

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

“(A, but) No more so than B” already has a perfectly good standard meaning: A may or may not be true or important, but B is at least as certainly true and important as A is. The phrase is apparently used as standard, however, with two other meanings, both meaning “especially (in the case of) B”, rather than “so is B, at least as much.”

[there’s always a lot of danger, and] no more so than [in a year like this one]

Risky business: all investments are a risk, and no more so than in an industry that is

Last-minute goals are sent to try us… and no more so than when you’re a betting man

As the song says “diamonds are a girls best friend” and no more so than this beautiful tension set titanium diamond ring pictured above.

At the semifinal stage of Women’s Team Classes 4/5 and Men’s Team Classes 9/10, they emerged successful. ¶ The Chinese rose to the occasion, no more so than in the final of the Women’s Team Classes 6/10 event and no more so than in the guise of Fan Lei.

This first set are of course more widely expressed by “(A, and) never more so than (in [the case of]) B”. Another set are more clearly spatially locative, and would normally be phrased “(A, and) nowhere more so than (in) B.”

There has always been a fascination, in the human mind, about strange facts, and no more so than in the North East of England; which abounds with stories

Yes, spending beyond one’s means is rampant in this country, and no more so than in the halls of Congress. ¶ There are many problems in the US financial system, from a large budget deficit, a complicated and usurious tax code, high individual tax rates, and a large and growing trade imbalance. While many people will point to one of these as our country’s major problem, they are only symptoms. The underlying problem is the quantity and growth of spending of the US Government.

Interesting, what?

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2009-01-08 14:40:57)


*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 2009-01-08 16:03:20

kem
Eggcornista
From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2851

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

A snowclone. You might suggest it to the snowclone database (http://snowclones.org/)-the editor there has not included this one in her lists.

If I understand this construction, B is supposed to be an adverbial clause modifying the verb of A. So the construction would be

/N/ /VP/, but no/never more so than /AdvP/

This means that the diamonds example you cite is poorly constructed, since it uses a NP instead of an AdvP. Unless there is an alternate format for the snowclone.

A couple of months ago, Chris asked about having a subforum for snowclones (http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/forum/view … hp?id=3377). I’m not sure what she means by a “subforum,” but when she does her reconstruction of the eggcorn site, she might consider a new category for snowclones in the “Eggcornish Meeting Places.” The snowclone database site is irregularly updated, and doesn’t seem to attract many comments. The other slip categories that people on this forum like to discuss, and which they seem to recognize as reasonably distinct entities, are flounders, idiom blends (blidioms) and mondegreens. Perhaps each could have its own box.

Last edited by kem (2009-01-08 16:18:54)


Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.

Offline

 

#3 2009-01-08 17:10:01

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

Yeah, I guess the diamond one would be “none more so than NP” rather than “never more so than AdvP”. Sloppy of me—thanks for catching it.
.
The “no more so than” construction can, in standard usage, take either an NP, a VP or an AdvP, I think, depending on what is before the phrase: “He is guilty, to be sure, but no more so than she (is)”, or “he is guilty when he looks like that, but no more so than (he is) when he looks angelic.”

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2009-01-08 17:11:58)


*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

 

#4 2009-01-08 17:47:37

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

kem wrote:

A snowclone. You might suggest it to the snowclone database (http://snowclones.org/)-the editor there has not included this one in her lists.

How so? I am not used to the notion of a snowclone—I just had to go look it up—, but Wikipedia calls it ‘a type of cliché and phrasal template originally defined as “a multi-use, customizable, instantly recognizable, time-worn, quoted or misquoted phrase or sentence that can be used in an entirely open array of different jokey variants by lazy journalists and writers.”’
.
Yes, [/N/ /VP/, but no/never/nowhere more so than /AdvP/] and [/N/ (/VP/), but none more so than /NP/] are closely related, well-established (=clichéd) patterns with slots in them that may be filled by an open array of variants. I don’t see that the variants are particularly jokey, and it is certainly not only journalists and writers (lazy or otherwise) who use them. Much of the syntax of any language, I believe, is constructed of just such phrases with slots to be filled in—we usually call them syntactic constructions. Why is this different from such run-of-the-mill ones?
.
(It’s a snarkless question, by the way—I’m genuinely curious as to what you mean by “snowclone”.)
.
In any case, if I understand correctly, snowclones aren’t supposed to be errors, just examples of lazy (pseudo-?) creative usage. These cases of “no more so” for “never/nowhere/none” are, at least from my perspective, errors.
.
Yes, subfora for other types of errors would be fun. But it risks making this a pretty different kind of site. Though, of course, we are already making it that in some degree by posting things into this “slips, innovations and other errors” section.
.
Several other categories we wind up discussing fairly often seem to be (4) non-eggcornish malapropisms, (5) phonologically motivated errors (e.g. phonological metatheses) (6) typos and other writing-related (but not clearly motivated phonologically) errors, and (7) reading-based errors. The types are very often mixed, of course. Would different “boxes” for each of these be better than the current “catch-all” non-eggcorn box? I’m not really sure, either way.

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2009-01-08 17:53:30)


*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 2009-01-08 18:41:05

kem
Eggcornista
From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2851

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

David –
The Wikipedia piece on snowclones seems to be a bit misleading. Snowclones aren’t necessarily “jokey.” They are cliches-though not always overworked ones-that are phrasal and sentence templates. Some can be powerful rhetorical devices. Many years ago, long before anyone knew what a snowclone was, I did a Greek reading course on the Attic orators (Demosthenes, etc.). I noticed when I was translating the speeches how often the ancient orators used phrasal templates to construct their speeches. They were forced to learn these templates as part of their rhetorical training. We no longer teach rhetoric as a subject, but good speakers still have an ear for such templates. Winston Churchill, for example, made liberal use of them. Any snowclone that is overused, of course, becomes trite, and the ones we notice most readily are the ones we hear too often. Your trained eye has caught a non-trite snowclone that no one seems to have noticed before.

The Language Log entries (http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/language … 00350.html) and the snowclone database should give a more balanced view of what snowclones are.

I think some of the language errors you mention as subforum candidates-(4) through (7)-can be covered in the current “slips” forum.

Last edited by kem (2009-01-08 23:17:59)


Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.

Offline

 

#6 2009-01-08 19:12:28

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

Are the examples we started the discussion with not erroneous to you, Kem? (Leaving aside the descriptivist dogma that nothing is erroneous if the speaker thinks it is standard.)


*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

 

#7 2009-01-08 23:16:45

kem
Eggcornista
From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2851

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

“Erroneous?” Do you mean erroneous in the sense of “logically inept?”

When we say that “B is at least as true as A” we are not starting with a level playing field, where both A and B are considered equally factual or nonfactual. We are starting with a situation in which the communication targets believe A, but for some reason they do not accept B on par with A. So to proclaim that both A and B are equal is another way of saying that that the truth value (or relevancy or importance) of B has to travel farther to get to the same place that A has already reached. This is another way of calling attention to B, emphasizing its movement and transformation. So I guess that I don’t see the snowclone “A, but no more so than B” being used incorrectly in the examples you cite. Unless I’m missing something.

As you note, though, nothing is really misused if it communicates. I remember being told many times in high school that phrases like “I don’t want no trouble” were wrong because “two negatives make a positive.” Then I started studying other languages and learned that in many languages “double negatives make a strong no.” It finally dawned on me (I’m a slow learner) that double negatives only make a positive in math. In English they often do exactly what they do in other languages. So I’m not sure what we gain by looking too closely at the logic of this snowclone. Living languages would rather wave dead chickens in the dark than make the pilgrimage to Apollo’s shrine.

Last edited by kem (2009-01-08 23:26:52)


Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.

Offline

 

#8 2009-01-09 07:40:37

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

By “erroneous” I meant “abnormal”, i.e. “in contravention of the norm”.
.
If nothing else, the change from “but” to “and” is a significant difference. In “John is good at orienteering, but no more so than Jane” it doesn’t work to say “and no more so”. In “all investments are a risk, and never more so than in a time of economic crisis” it doesn’t work to say “but never more so”. The change reflects the semantic distinction between a somewhat surprising contradiction of expectations in the one case, and a more-to-be-expected extension of them in the other.
.
Your analysis of A and B moving different cognitive distances to achieve parity of truth-value, importance, etc., seems exactly right to me. But it is only true in the “but no more so than B” case, not the “and never more so than B” construction.
.
When I hear the other examples given of snow-clones, I think “Aeh. Somebody trying to be clever. It sort of works.” When I hear these, I think, “Whoa, that’s odd! Somebody got mixed up, or doesn’t know the difference.”
.
Yes, there is a perfectly right sense that, once a construction is entrenched in the speech of a community it is correct for that community. In that sense every eggcorn is, by definition, perfectly normal for those who use it. But it is also, by definition, not normal for the (past?) majority of other speakers of the eggcorners’ language. In snowclones, the pattern used is normal for the population at large—in these cases, if the norm coincides with my intuitions (which of course it doesn’t necessarily) the pattern used contravenes the norm, even if only slightly.

Last edited by DavidTuggy (2009-01-09 08:02:58)


*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

 

#9 2009-01-09 12:48:25

kem
Eggcornista
From: Victoria, BC
Registered: 2007-08-28
Posts: 2851

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

Seems to me like “and’ and “but” are both feasible, in most cases. Depends on where you think the opposition implied in the “but” lies. The examples of “but” in textbooks on English, as you well know, are highly simplified. To descry exactly when “but” should replace “and” requires long exposure to English. It’s a bit like “doch” in German. I can use “doch” correctly in some easy expressions where the implied opposition is transparent, but native speakers are always salting their speech with “dochs” that aren’t in the textbooks.

In that sense every eggcorn is, by definition, perfectly normal for those who use it…. In snowclones, the pattern used is normal for the population at large…

By calling the expression you found a “snowclone,” I didn’t mean that it was or was not an eggcorn. I hadn’t given the issue much thought. What you say is true, though. Eggcorns and snowclones arise from partially opposed language vectors. Nonetheless, snowclones, because they tend to become ossified expressions, can be the occasion for eggcorn-like substitutions, especially when the snowclone variables are filled in by speakers who are not very familiar with the original context of the snowclone phrase.


Hatching new language, one eggcorn at a time.

Offline

 

#10 2009-01-09 14:09:26

DavidTuggy
Eggcornista
From: Mexico
Registered: 2007-10-11
Posts: 2714
Website

Re: no more so than << never/nowhere more so than

Yes, the usage of “and” vs. “but” is extremely complex, and somewhat variable between Englishes.

John is good at orienteering, and no more so than Jane

That sounds normal to you?

All investments are a risk, but never more so than in a time of economic crisis

You’re right, that can fly. I overstated when I said “but never more so” doesn’t work here. It still doesn’t sound as good/normal to me as “and never more so”. And, when so used with “but”, B is definitely presented as somehow having to travel a longer cognitive distance to arrive: it almost means “but you were probably not thinking of the effect of an economic crisis on the risks, so let me tell you it only makes them greater.”
.
As you say, it’s complex.


*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

 

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