Talk:Eggcorn

Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here

For the previous, now archived, list of suggested examples, see Talk:Eggcorn/Archive 6#Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here (old)

Note: Suggestions here that don't quote a reliable source can't be considered for inclusion on this page

• Take for granite (take for granted) https://grammarist.com/eggcorns/take-for-granted-or-take-for-granite/ or https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/pardon-the-expression/take-for-granted-vs-take-for-granite/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.213.32.199 (talk) 23:40, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Roller Board for Roll Aboard suitcase — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.14.55 (talk) 05:13, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

How about:

• "step foot in", for "set foot in"
• "under weigh" for "under way" or "underway" Kanjuzi (talk) 08:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
• "bonified" instead of "bona fide"; I've been editing this page for a few years, and had never heard this one before. I think it's great, and that we should include it in the examples. Paulmlieberman (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• What about "stump of approval" instead of "stamp of approval"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:72:0:6480:0:0:0:DC (talk) 16:09, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

  None of the above can be considered unless discussed in a reliable source. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

• On Wikipedia, I repeatedly encountered the phrase "an indefinitely blocked user avoiding their block", although what was meant was "evading" their block. The word "avoiding" in this phrase is also an example of an eggcorn, as it is plausible when used in the same context. 2A02:AB04:2AB:700:5C75:13F8:2995:36 (talk) 17:42, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

  Not sure it is an eggcorn, as in that context 'avoid' and 'evade' mean very much the same thing. Anyway, though, user discussion on Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for citation purposes. @ MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

  This dispute comes up often in Eve Online where star systems all have a "security rating" and police ("Concord") only patrol systems with 0.5 and higher security. You can avoid Concord entirely by spending your time in "low-sec" systems and that's a perfectly legitimate way to play. However, if you commit crime in "high-sec" and immediately dock with a station (or use other means) to evade Concord, your account gets suspended or banned. Avoidance is all about starting distant and staying distant from something with no specific intent. Evasion is all about starting close and intentionally becoming distant from something which has the specific intent to restrain you. Avoiding Concord is encouraged; evading Concord breaches the game rules. It's a very clear distinction but new players who don't understand the words can come to the wrong conclusion. In the Wikipedia ban context, avoiding the ban means spending their online time on other websites (or passively reading WP) whereas evading the ban means taking steps to circumvent the measures in place and persisting in actively editing WP. 49.181.176.222 (talk) 04:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

  It's also a bigger real-world issue with tax avoidance (legal) and tax evasion (illegal). Confusing two similar technical words doesn't really seem like an eggcorn, though. Belbury (talk) 09:28, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

• The Killers sing the phrase "every once and a little while" in their song When You Were Young. This isn't a mondegreen since those are the actual lyrics. Nor is it a standard idiom (that's "every once in a little while"). It's something peculiar The Killers invented and a Google search for that phrase only turns up references to their lyrics. While this shows that the lyricist wasn't copying any established cohort of people who say "and a little while", it also means there aren't reliable sources for classifying this as an eggcorn. 49.181.176.222 (talk) 04:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

  I was coming to this page because after learning about eggcorns I started examining phrases I use, I thought about it and I used to confuse "once in a while" with "once and a while". I looked it up on google and there was a suggestion of "once and a while vs once in a while" the phrase might contain another eggcorn as well. I also found in one article mentioning "once in awhile" being mentioned, so it might also be a common might be a misinterpretation.

  https://kris-spisak.com/writing-tip-every-once-and-a-while-vs-every-once-in-a-while/#:~:text=Reminder%3A%20%E2%80%9CEvery%20once%20in%20a,red%20pen%20at%20the%20offenders.

  https://brians.wsu.edu/2016/05/19/once-and-a-while/

  as an aside "damp squid" doesn't make sense, it seems more like a malapropism, squids like being damp and it wouldn't make sense in the context "the party went off like a damp squib" and "the party went off like a damp squid". The same goes for common examples "toe the line" for "tow the line", "death nail" for "death knell", "for all intensive purposes" for "for all intents and purposes" though I'm less strongly convinced about the first two. If I'm mistaken please lets discus, my understanding is the definition usually includes

  "An eggcorn is the alteration of a phrase through the mishearing or reinterpretation of one or more of its elements, creating a new phrase having a different meaning from the original but which still makes sense and is plausible when used in the same context."

  the still makes sense in context is what I think these examples don't follow, they also don't follow logic as in "damp squid" which I see logic and creativity also listed as requirements.

  "card shark" for "card sharp" is an example as it's creative, follows logic, and fits in context. like sharks are apex predators while someone who is excelling at slight of hand would also be at the apex of skill or sharp. I think at this point it might be a folk etymology. 24.185.252.30 (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

  • As to "every once and a little while", this is more of a mumpsimus than an eggcorn. To qualify as an eggcorn, a phrase should be meaningful, maybe even adding a richness to the original; e.g. "old-timer's disease" for "Alzheimer's disease".

  Paulmlieberman (talk) 15:00, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

  would "ripe with" and "rife with"/ "damp squid" and "damp squib" count as adding to the so called richness 24.185.252.30 (talk) 04:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

  "Rife with" sounds possible if you can cite a reliable source MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

• Noting "bone apple tea" here as a phrase that doesn't appear to fit the definition, but which has appeared in the article in the past and used to redirect here. (Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_11#Bone_Apple_Tea made it a wiktionary redirect last year.) I don't think it's an eggcorn, as it isn't "plausible when used in the same context" in the way that the other phrases are. Perhaps there's an argument that in a conversation between two English speakers who don't speak any French, both the correct and misheard versions might seem equally plausible to them? But I feel like eggcorns have to have the angle where if the speaker stops to think superficially about what they've just said, the phrase makes logical sense to them ("it's a disease that old-timers get") and they conclude that they're right to keep using it. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  You're right - I hadn't read the definition of eggcorn closely enough when I thought of that example. The property of "making sense in its own right" is what makes a standard malapropism an eggcorn.

  Until someone makes a drink named "bone apple tea" that, when drunk, aides in increasing one's appetite or otherwise enjoyment of food, I don't think it counts as an eggcorn. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 21:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• "Marshall law" for "martial law"

Added by User:Bremps 15 December 2022‎. Cnilep (talk) 06:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I think it's fairly reasonable. Marshall could mean "arrange or assemble (a group of people, especially soldiers) in order.", which would have plenty to do the suspension of ordinary civilian law. Can also refer to the head of the police department. It would be kind of plausible if it was actually spelt "marshall law". Bremps 06:48, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to sleep soon, so I may respond in the morning. Bremps 06:50, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

• "Tow the line" for "toe the line" is a common example that I was surprised to see excluded from the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvonwerder1 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Can you quote a reliable source? See note at top. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

• "lack toast and tolerant" for "lactose intolerant"

References

Edit to lede

Hello, I was editing the lede to replace one of the given examples with the eponymous one, so that it would be explained in a preview (without needing to read the whole article). I accidentally submitted the change before putting an edit summary. Please consider unreverting the change. Cerulean Depths (talk) 00:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Does "pencil-crayon" count?

It's a thing Canadians call colored pencils (example: "She memorized every pencil-crayon color in the box" from "Life, in a Nutshell" by Barenaked Ladies) because their boxes of Crayola colored pencils say "PENCIL/CRAYON" ("crayon" being French for "pencil") on them. Not quite a malapropism like the other eggcorns on the page, but a similar phenomenon in that it's an apropos term borne out of a misunderstanding. Octan (talk) 01:21, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

No, an eggcorn depends on mishearing or reinterpreting pronunciation. For example, the word eggcorn presumably results from the similar sound of /ɛɡ+kɔɹn/ (egg corn) and /eɪ.kɚn/ (acorn). If pencil-crayon results from reinterpreting the bilingual written form "PENCIL/CRAYON" as a single English word, then that is a different type of reinterpretation. In both cases there is a meaning component (acorns are shaped a bit like eggs; colored pencils are used similarly to wax crayons), but the misunderstanding comes from a different domain. Cnilep (talk) 03:31, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Memmott 2015 user-generated content?

Several items in the article currently are cited to a 2015 NPR "Two-Way" post by Mark Memmott. According to the piece, "On Saturday, we asked folks to send us examples of the "eggcorns" they love or hate. [...] we've put together a list of the 100 that were either mentioned often or just made us smile."

This strikes me as something close to the user-generated content that is usually unacceptable. Unlike, say, Reddit or (the site previously known as) Twitter, Memmott and whoever else "we" refers to probably exercised some editorial judgement over the list. But they claim no expertise on the subject, and included examples that made them smile. It seems to me that eighteen examples is more than enough to illustrate the point, so that removing those five more won't negatively effect the article. Cnilep (talk) 06:58, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. Eighteen examples is indeed plenty. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

They also include examples which don't seem to be eggcorns at all, like (from just the first page) agreeance and callapitter. The source seems to fail WP:RSEDITORIAL for linguistics. Belbury (talk) 11:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I have removed them. Cnilep (talk) 05:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)