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 2006-06-23 22:46:03

rhmonson
Member
Registered: 2006-06-23
Posts: 1

wholistic for holistic

I’m new to this site, and maybe this post falls under the category of trying to locate the boundaries of what an eggcorn is.

A review on Amazon.com contains the following sentence:

The seeming burden of Brian’s book is to explain that a wholistic synthesis can be made of the great expanse of Christian tradition- not just within confessional or “Evangelical” Christianity, but across all self identifying Christianity if we are generous enough in our theological- or better, missional-theological- deliberation.

Is this an eggcorn? Or just an often-repeated mistake that has now become semi-accepted? Or a word that many good editors would leave as is?

(I just checked Webster’s 3rd Int. Dict, and “wholistic” is listed with the instruction to see HOLISTIC.)

Offline

 

#2 2007-05-20 11:50:44

Rutger
Member
Registered: 2007-05-15
Posts: 3

Re: wholistic for holistic

I also noticed this. No one has picked this up in a year? English is not my native language and when I saw the term “wholistic” with the proper context of holistic, I instantly thought it was an eggcorn. Yet google shows that word is used extensively. I guess it’s not even “nearly mainstream” anymore, but just mainstream.

Offline

 

#3 2007-05-20 14:53:13

patschwieterman
Administrator
From: California
Registered: 2005-10-25
Posts: 1680

Re: wholistic for holistic

“Wholistic” is neither an eggcorn nor a mistake. It’s a “calque”—a transfer from one language to another of the same meaning. The Greek word for “whole” is “holos”; it is kinda cool that the Greek and English words resemble each other. Judging just from the OED entry (my etymological dictionary has gone missing), it’s not clear that they’re etymological cousins.

Both words first arose in fairly technical and academic circumstances in the first half of the 20th C, so I doubt that “wholism” was simply an error for “holism” at first—it probably arose as a self-consciously “nativized” variant. Now of course both are standard and in the dictionaries.

Last edited by patschwieterman (2007-05-20 14:53:56)

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