1
00:00:03,000 --> 00:00:09,720
Speaker 1: Welcome to Invention, a production of I Heart Radio. Hey,

2
00:00:09,800 --> 00:00:12,720
Speaker 1: welcome to Invention. My name is Robert Lamb and I'm

3
00:00:12,760 --> 00:00:15,920
Speaker 1: Joe McCormick. And today we're going to be discussing a

4
00:00:16,040 --> 00:00:19,919
Speaker 1: linguistic subject, some linguistic inventions. And I thought it would

5
00:00:19,920 --> 00:00:23,640
Speaker 1: be a good idea to begin with some good malapropisms.

6
00:00:23,680 --> 00:00:26,799
Speaker 1: I love a good malapropism, and we're of course not

7
00:00:26,880 --> 00:00:29,880
Speaker 1: above coining one here and there ourselves on the show sometimes.

8
00:00:30,360 --> 00:00:33,400
Speaker 1: Uh So, what's a malapropism before we get into our

9
00:00:33,560 --> 00:00:39,760
Speaker 1: favorite examples. It's the usually unintentionally humorous misuse or distortion

10
00:00:39,960 --> 00:00:43,040
Speaker 1: of a word or phrase. So usually it's a word

11
00:00:43,120 --> 00:00:45,800
Speaker 1: or phrase that sounds like what you mean to say,

12
00:00:45,960 --> 00:00:48,440
Speaker 1: but is not what you mean to say. For example,

13
00:00:49,080 --> 00:00:52,080
Speaker 1: Jesus healing the leopards. That's a great one. Yeah, they're

14
00:00:52,120 --> 00:00:54,600
Speaker 1: often used to comedic effect, like you, like you mentioned

15
00:00:54,920 --> 00:00:57,920
Speaker 1: and uh sometimes you'll see the latter. This idea of

16
00:00:58,040 --> 00:01:02,280
Speaker 1: it being a phrase defined is a malla for like

17
00:01:02,280 --> 00:01:06,280
Speaker 1: a metaphor. Also it sounds delicious, right though we have

18
00:01:06,319 --> 00:01:09,440
Speaker 1: to stress that malafor itself is an invented word and

19
00:01:09,520 --> 00:01:12,959
Speaker 1: potentially uh and I'll appropism in and of itself. Oh,

20
00:01:13,040 --> 00:01:15,600
Speaker 1: I can see that, like somebody was trying to say malapropism,

21
00:01:15,720 --> 00:01:19,040
Speaker 1: but they got confused and said malaf right, or or

22
00:01:19,160 --> 00:01:21,240
Speaker 1: they just intentionally did it. And we'll get into some

23
00:01:21,240 --> 00:01:23,040
Speaker 1: of the more intentional acts of this as we go.

24
00:01:23,600 --> 00:01:28,760
Speaker 1: The Sopranos is a great source of very memorable malapropisms.

25
00:01:28,800 --> 00:01:31,759
Speaker 1: I like when there's part where Christopher Multa Santi talks

26
00:01:31,760 --> 00:01:35,520
Speaker 1: about creating a little dysentery in the ranks, which that

27
00:01:35,560 --> 00:01:39,280
Speaker 1: one reminds me of one about scientology, the the idea

28
00:01:39,360 --> 00:01:44,640
Speaker 1: that l Ron Hubbard had the philosophy of diuretics. But

29
00:01:44,720 --> 00:01:47,760
Speaker 1: there's another one in the Sopranos where the character Little

30
00:01:47,800 --> 00:01:50,920
Speaker 1: Carmines he's talking about seeing in the horror movie and

31
00:01:50,960 --> 00:01:55,160
Speaker 1: he says it juxtaposes the sacred in the propane. Or

32
00:01:55,440 --> 00:01:58,320
Speaker 1: there's a part where Tony describes his mom as an

33
00:01:58,320 --> 00:02:02,480
Speaker 1: alba core around my neck. Oh, instead of an albatross.

34
00:02:02,560 --> 00:02:04,960
Speaker 1: Very good. This is more of a phrase. But I

35
00:02:05,000 --> 00:02:08,800
Speaker 1: instantly thought of the of The Big Lebowski when he's

36
00:02:08,919 --> 00:02:12,840
Speaker 1: he points out the Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women. Um,

37
00:02:12,880 --> 00:02:15,440
Speaker 1: the code of the Corner Brothers paint with this sort

38
00:02:15,480 --> 00:02:18,440
Speaker 1: of brush a lot in their dialogue. I was reading

39
00:02:19,080 --> 00:02:20,960
Speaker 1: a little bit about this lip. Basically I was looking

40
00:02:21,000 --> 00:02:25,200
Speaker 1: for some more examples of of of malapropisms in the

41
00:02:25,240 --> 00:02:29,040
Speaker 1: Coen Brothers work, and I ran across this Senses of

42
00:02:29,040 --> 00:02:32,680
Speaker 1: Cinema post by Paul Coughland from several years back, and

43
00:02:32,720 --> 00:02:35,200
Speaker 1: he described the Cohen Brothers use of dialogue as quote

44
00:02:35,320 --> 00:02:40,320
Speaker 1: the dialogue of wonderful inarticulacy. That's about right. Yeah. Now,

45
00:02:40,400 --> 00:02:44,639
Speaker 1: you'll also another place you see a lot of malapropism

46
00:02:45,240 --> 00:02:47,360
Speaker 1: is that you'll see it sometimes used as part of

47
00:02:47,440 --> 00:02:51,639
Speaker 1: racial stereotypes. One example that comes to mind, and you

48
00:02:51,680 --> 00:02:55,400
Speaker 1: see this listed on various like trope websites, is the

49
00:02:55,440 --> 00:02:58,520
Speaker 1: Fisher Stevens role in the Short Circuits movies. I've never

50
00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:02,480
Speaker 1: seen Short Circuit. Well it's probably alright, there's no reason

51
00:03:02,520 --> 00:03:04,440
Speaker 1: to go back to these, but these were a force

52
00:03:04,560 --> 00:03:07,960
Speaker 1: movies about about a robot, like they become self aware

53
00:03:08,000 --> 00:03:10,120
Speaker 1: and it has like a laser cannon on its shoulder

54
00:03:10,200 --> 00:03:13,440
Speaker 1: and it's like a puppet. Does it do cute robot malapropisms? No,

55
00:03:13,680 --> 00:03:19,239
Speaker 1: it doesn't. But Fisher Stevens plays Um, an Indian scientist,

56
00:03:19,560 --> 00:03:23,000
Speaker 1: uh and and he's this this uh, you know this

57
00:03:23,000 --> 00:03:26,440
Speaker 1: this uh, this accent, and he's he just busts out

58
00:03:26,440 --> 00:03:28,920
Speaker 1: a number of these and ultimately, you know it's it's

59
00:03:28,960 --> 00:03:32,120
Speaker 1: kind of like this idea, the comedic racial stereotype of

60
00:03:32,160 --> 00:03:34,359
Speaker 1: someone who doesn't have a great grasp on the English

61
00:03:34,480 --> 00:03:38,240
Speaker 1: language and therefore stumbles into all of these. That's unfortunately,

62
00:03:39,120 --> 00:03:42,080
Speaker 1: but the use of melopropisms in fiction does go way

63
00:03:42,160 --> 00:03:45,760
Speaker 1: way back. Like Shakespeare used malapropisms a lot. The character

64
00:03:45,840 --> 00:03:49,440
Speaker 1: of Dogberry and Much Ado about Nothing famously delivers a

65
00:03:49,440 --> 00:03:51,720
Speaker 1: bunch of these and their grades. So Dogberry is this

66
00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:55,240
Speaker 1: incompetent night constable and he's supposed to be I think

67
00:03:55,240 --> 00:03:59,000
Speaker 1: a satire on the amateur police forces of Elizabethan times,

68
00:03:59,440 --> 00:04:01,360
Speaker 1: and a lot of the humor comes through and him

69
00:04:01,400 --> 00:04:05,120
Speaker 1: giving confused orders like um, he when he's trying to

70
00:04:05,120 --> 00:04:08,040
Speaker 1: get one of his deputies to apprehend all vagrants, but

71
00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:11,200
Speaker 1: instead he says, you are to comprehend all vagram men

72
00:04:12,200 --> 00:04:14,840
Speaker 1: um and he he tells them to be vigetant. I

73
00:04:14,920 --> 00:04:17,960
Speaker 1: beseech you uh. And then there's a great part later

74
00:04:18,000 --> 00:04:20,400
Speaker 1: where he claims that a bad dude will be condemned

75
00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:25,599
Speaker 1: into everlasting redemption. Well, there's a. There's fun to be

76
00:04:25,680 --> 00:04:29,520
Speaker 1: had with with with malopropisms, right, because you can sort

77
00:04:29,560 --> 00:04:32,799
Speaker 1: of you can have your character fumble into something saying

78
00:04:32,800 --> 00:04:36,880
Speaker 1: something a little more articulate than I mean to it. Times. Yes, yeah,

79
00:04:36,920 --> 00:04:40,479
Speaker 1: that's interesting, Like the idea of everlasting redemption is sort

80
00:04:40,480 --> 00:04:43,039
Speaker 1: of a cool metaphor, even though he just is screwing

81
00:04:43,120 --> 00:04:46,640
Speaker 1: up words. But after this character. Actually, since sometime in

82
00:04:46,680 --> 00:04:50,400
Speaker 1: the nineteenth century, malapropisms have also been known as dog

83
00:04:50,440 --> 00:04:53,440
Speaker 1: barry is ums. There was another one I came across

84
00:04:53,480 --> 00:04:55,400
Speaker 1: that I'd never read before. But this is from the

85
00:04:55,440 --> 00:04:59,200
Speaker 1: real world. So former Texas Governor and U. S. Energy

86
00:04:59,240 --> 00:05:02,840
Speaker 1: Secretary Rick Perry. He's famous for the for saying the

87
00:05:02,880 --> 00:05:07,160
Speaker 1: oops when he couldn't remember something. But also, um, that's

88
00:05:07,160 --> 00:05:11,080
Speaker 1: not what I was bringing up. On August there was

89
00:05:11,080 --> 00:05:14,120
Speaker 1: an article in the Texas Tribune by John Reynolds that

90
00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:17,360
Speaker 1: reported that Perry had been speaking to a crowd and

91
00:05:17,480 --> 00:05:20,400
Speaker 1: at this event, he told the crowd, quote, we need

92
00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:22,960
Speaker 1: to look at the states, which are the lavatories of

93
00:05:23,040 --> 00:05:28,200
Speaker 1: innovation and democracy. Uh yeah, so what what with that?

94
00:05:28,360 --> 00:05:30,159
Speaker 1: If we were to take that literally, like, what would

95
00:05:30,160 --> 00:05:32,560
Speaker 1: that even mean? Uh? I think that's the other thing.

96
00:05:32,760 --> 00:05:34,159
Speaker 1: The part of it too, is like, even if they're

97
00:05:34,200 --> 00:05:37,680
Speaker 1: not quite accidentally profound, we can't help a puzzle over

98
00:05:37,720 --> 00:05:42,080
Speaker 1: it because it will inject a bizarre metaphor mental image

99
00:05:42,120 --> 00:05:44,160
Speaker 1: into our head and then we're just forced to wrestle

100
00:05:44,200 --> 00:05:46,320
Speaker 1: with it. Right now, there are also just lots of

101
00:05:46,320 --> 00:05:49,440
Speaker 1: these people making regular everyday speech. We probably do them

102
00:05:49,440 --> 00:05:51,760
Speaker 1: all the time. Everybody does them. One of my favorites

103
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:53,760
Speaker 1: I ran across was the idea of all the people

104
00:05:53,800 --> 00:05:57,599
Speaker 1: who died in the blue Bonnet plague. Uh see. I

105
00:05:57,600 --> 00:05:59,560
Speaker 1: saw that in the notes, and I didn't even get

106
00:05:59,560 --> 00:06:02,240
Speaker 1: it until said it out loud now, and that that

107
00:06:02,320 --> 00:06:04,320
Speaker 1: points out an interesting thing, which is that there there

108
00:06:04,360 --> 00:06:08,360
Speaker 1: are multiple different ways that people put together malapropisms. Like

109
00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:11,839
Speaker 1: I was reading a paper by the linguist Arnold Mzuki

110
00:06:12,000 --> 00:06:15,520
Speaker 1: on classical malapropisms, and Swiki points out that lots of

111
00:06:15,560 --> 00:06:19,080
Speaker 1: malapropisms are just approximations that come out of our mouths

112
00:06:19,160 --> 00:06:21,440
Speaker 1: due to the tip of the tongue effect. This is

113
00:06:21,440 --> 00:06:23,640
Speaker 1: something we've talked about on Stuff to Blow your Mind before.

114
00:06:24,080 --> 00:06:25,800
Speaker 1: You can go back and find our episode on that

115
00:06:25,880 --> 00:06:28,799
Speaker 1: if you google it, I'm sure, but the short version

116
00:06:28,880 --> 00:06:32,679
Speaker 1: is you are failing to call the correct word from memory,

117
00:06:33,160 --> 00:06:37,400
Speaker 1: and by accident you employ a similar sounding word instead.

118
00:06:38,080 --> 00:06:40,160
Speaker 1: You can often hear this, especially in people who may

119
00:06:40,200 --> 00:06:42,440
Speaker 1: have been having a bit of alcohol to drink. Like

120
00:06:42,560 --> 00:06:46,239
Speaker 1: Often words that get swapped start with the same letters

121
00:06:46,360 --> 00:06:49,040
Speaker 1: or sounds, like you know, uh, this database is a

122
00:06:49,120 --> 00:06:52,640
Speaker 1: vast suppository of information. I guess actually that wouldn't start

123
00:06:52,680 --> 00:06:54,560
Speaker 1: with the same sound, but you know, you know what

124
00:06:54,600 --> 00:06:58,960
Speaker 1: I mean. But other times malapropisms have more unique ideologies.

125
00:06:59,040 --> 00:07:02,920
Speaker 1: For example, when somebody learns a word or phrase by

126
00:07:03,120 --> 00:07:07,159
Speaker 1: mishearing it and then never corrects their original misimpression. I

127
00:07:07,160 --> 00:07:09,560
Speaker 1: know this has happened multiple times in my life. Blue

128
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:12,000
Speaker 1: bonnet plague would probably be a good example here. It

129
00:07:12,120 --> 00:07:16,760
Speaker 1: suggests that somebody heard somebody talking about the bubonic plague

130
00:07:16,800 --> 00:07:19,920
Speaker 1: but misheard how they pronounced it, and then just never

131
00:07:20,000 --> 00:07:22,280
Speaker 1: got corrected on that. Yeah, I think we can all

132
00:07:22,320 --> 00:07:24,080
Speaker 1: relate to that. We all have examples of that in

133
00:07:24,160 --> 00:07:28,600
Speaker 1: our our own life. Totally. But while malpropisms are themselves

134
00:07:28,800 --> 00:07:31,080
Speaker 1: a normal part of speech, they go back into the

135
00:07:31,080 --> 00:07:33,640
Speaker 1: mist of history. Everybody does them, and everybody's been doing

136
00:07:33,680 --> 00:07:36,880
Speaker 1: them for thousands of years. Probably the name we use

137
00:07:37,000 --> 00:07:40,480
Speaker 1: for them has a very distinct origin in history, and

138
00:07:40,520 --> 00:07:44,680
Speaker 1: that origin lies with an Irish satirist playwright and politician

139
00:07:45,120 --> 00:07:49,200
Speaker 1: named Richard Brinsley Sheridan who lived from seventeen fifty one

140
00:07:49,600 --> 00:07:53,680
Speaker 1: to eighteen sixteen. Sheridan wrote a number of successful comedies,

141
00:07:53,720 --> 00:07:58,080
Speaker 1: but his seventeen seventy five play called The Rivals introduced

142
00:07:58,120 --> 00:08:02,440
Speaker 1: the world to a character named Mrs Malaprop, whom another

143
00:08:02,520 --> 00:08:06,960
Speaker 1: character says is infamous for delivering words quote so ingeniously

144
00:08:07,080 --> 00:08:13,400
Speaker 1: misapplied without being mispronounced. So, for example, Mrs Malaprop calls

145
00:08:13,480 --> 00:08:18,160
Speaker 1: one other character the very pineapple of politeness, and at

146
00:08:18,160 --> 00:08:21,320
Speaker 1: another point she refers to an allegory lying on the

147
00:08:21,360 --> 00:08:23,840
Speaker 1: banks of the nile, which we should point out gets

148
00:08:23,840 --> 00:08:27,440
Speaker 1: it wrong twice because the nile has crocodiles, not alligators.

149
00:08:27,680 --> 00:08:30,640
Speaker 1: Oh I didn't even get that one at first. Allegory

150
00:08:30,840 --> 00:08:33,400
Speaker 1: and alligators. Okay, I think that joke works better on

151
00:08:33,480 --> 00:08:36,120
Speaker 1: people who are less obsessed with crocodilians than you and I.

152
00:08:37,360 --> 00:08:39,880
Speaker 1: Uh so. So it seems that most usage of the

153
00:08:39,960 --> 00:08:43,520
Speaker 1: term malapropism in English actually dates back to this character

154
00:08:44,040 --> 00:08:47,400
Speaker 1: in a late eighteenth century Irish play. Maybe all usage

155
00:08:47,400 --> 00:08:50,360
Speaker 1: of it, but of course the name Mrs malaprop is

156
00:08:50,440 --> 00:08:54,839
Speaker 1: built out of existing words borrowed from other languages, like uh,

157
00:08:54,880 --> 00:09:00,000
Speaker 1: there's the there's this expression malapropos, meaning inappropriate, originally from

158
00:09:00,120 --> 00:09:02,440
Speaker 1: the French, where it would mean something like out of

159
00:09:02,520 --> 00:09:05,040
Speaker 1: place or a miss. But from the name of this

160
00:09:05,160 --> 00:09:07,760
Speaker 1: character we now get the label that we use specifically

161
00:09:07,800 --> 00:09:12,840
Speaker 1: for malapropisms, words used wrong in this way. And so

162
00:09:12,920 --> 00:09:16,199
Speaker 1: today we wanted to look at the phenomenon of invented

163
00:09:16,280 --> 00:09:19,920
Speaker 1: words like the word malapropism. There are tons of words

164
00:09:19,960 --> 00:09:22,040
Speaker 1: like this, you know. There there are some words that

165
00:09:22,240 --> 00:09:25,800
Speaker 1: enter the lexicon from works of fiction or mythology. There

166
00:09:25,800 --> 00:09:29,320
Speaker 1: are words that enter through deliberate coinage where somebody is

167
00:09:29,360 --> 00:09:33,239
Speaker 1: trying to create a term for a previously unnamed concept.

168
00:09:33,600 --> 00:09:36,320
Speaker 1: There are words that enter their changes in technology and

169
00:09:36,440 --> 00:09:39,640
Speaker 1: science and culture. And we wanted to talk about some

170
00:09:39,720 --> 00:09:42,240
Speaker 1: of our favorite stories of these words and explore how

171
00:09:42,280 --> 00:09:44,679
Speaker 1: they differ from other types of words. What what does

172
00:09:44,720 --> 00:09:47,959
Speaker 1: it take to invent a successful word and are there

173
00:09:47,960 --> 00:09:52,920
Speaker 1: any parallels to the invention of a successful piece of technology. Yeah,

174
00:09:52,960 --> 00:09:55,599
Speaker 1: it's it's a fascinating topic because it's, you know, the

175
00:09:56,480 --> 00:09:59,319
Speaker 1: world of language. It is a world that is invented,

176
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:03,040
Speaker 1: like all wor words are essentially invented. Um. Well, I

177
00:10:03,040 --> 00:10:04,920
Speaker 1: don't know if I agree with you there, because they

178
00:10:04,960 --> 00:10:07,920
Speaker 1: all do come from human brains. But I would say

179
00:10:07,920 --> 00:10:11,719
Speaker 1: maybe some words could be thought of more like features

180
00:10:11,760 --> 00:10:15,560
Speaker 1: of the human body, that maybe they just emerged from

181
00:10:15,679 --> 00:10:18,800
Speaker 1: us at some point in history without us trying to

182
00:10:18,880 --> 00:10:21,319
Speaker 1: find a word for something. That's true. The more the

183
00:10:21,400 --> 00:10:24,719
Speaker 1: sort of primal roots of language, which will be discussing.

184
00:10:25,480 --> 00:10:28,160
Speaker 1: But but still it's it's it's unlike most of the

185
00:10:28,200 --> 00:10:29,959
Speaker 1: other topics we've done. I don't know if we've done

186
00:10:29,960 --> 00:10:32,760
Speaker 1: a linguistic episode of invention yet, have we? I don't

187
00:10:32,800 --> 00:10:37,360
Speaker 1: know that there are obviously linguistic inventions. All Right, we're

188
00:10:37,360 --> 00:10:39,160
Speaker 1: gonna take a quick break, but we'll be right back.

189
00:10:45,080 --> 00:10:47,000
Speaker 1: All right, We're back, all right. So we'd like to

190
00:10:47,080 --> 00:10:50,560
Speaker 1: start by asking what came before? Uh? And I guess

191
00:10:50,600 --> 00:10:52,520
Speaker 1: in this case we would have to ask where do

192
00:10:52,640 --> 00:10:56,240
Speaker 1: words usually come from when they're not being deliberately coined

193
00:10:56,320 --> 00:10:59,480
Speaker 1: or invented by somebody. We know that most words are

194
00:10:59,559 --> 00:11:05,160
Speaker 1: not deliberate inventions. Obviously, the the deep origins of language

195
00:11:05,240 --> 00:11:09,480
Speaker 1: that's a massive and complicated subject, limited in large part

196
00:11:09,559 --> 00:11:13,400
Speaker 1: to inform speculations since we don't have physical evidence to

197
00:11:13,400 --> 00:11:16,480
Speaker 1: to discover or to refer to. You know, spoken words

198
00:11:16,480 --> 00:11:19,520
Speaker 1: don't leave fossils. Uh, And it's it's too big to

199
00:11:19,559 --> 00:11:23,000
Speaker 1: address at length today. But by setting linguistics within the

200
00:11:23,040 --> 00:11:26,280
Speaker 1: timeline of history, especially with the help of written sources,

201
00:11:26,320 --> 00:11:29,080
Speaker 1: we can learn a lot about how languages change over

202
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:33,400
Speaker 1: time and about where words come from. And one thing

203
00:11:33,440 --> 00:11:36,680
Speaker 1: that I think is extremely interesting is that many scholars

204
00:11:37,080 --> 00:11:42,360
Speaker 1: have noticed important parallels between the evolution of languages and

205
00:11:42,400 --> 00:11:47,120
Speaker 1: the evolution of species. In biology, there are important differences

206
00:11:47,200 --> 00:11:50,480
Speaker 1: as well, But just to mention one of these similarities,

207
00:11:50,800 --> 00:11:54,720
Speaker 1: like the living organisms on Earth, many of Earth's languages

208
00:11:54,880 --> 00:11:59,200
Speaker 1: show signs of having a common ancestor. We can show

209
00:11:59,240 --> 00:12:02,079
Speaker 1: signs of common ancestry and all living things on Earth

210
00:12:02,120 --> 00:12:05,560
Speaker 1: by comparing similarities in the genes and observing how those

211
00:12:05,640 --> 00:12:10,120
Speaker 1: genes change over time through evolution. Likewise, we can observe

212
00:12:10,160 --> 00:12:15,000
Speaker 1: similarities in some words and formations that many languages separated

213
00:12:15,040 --> 00:12:18,920
Speaker 1: over vast distances, seem to share, and observe how those

214
00:12:19,160 --> 00:12:23,079
Speaker 1: pronunciations and semantics change over time. And in fact, the

215
00:12:23,360 --> 00:12:25,600
Speaker 1: kind of strange thing is that it was obvious that

216
00:12:25,760 --> 00:12:30,480
Speaker 1: languages evolve over time from common ancestors. Before it was

217
00:12:30,520 --> 00:12:34,880
Speaker 1: obvious that plants and animals do this because you know,

218
00:12:34,880 --> 00:12:37,800
Speaker 1: it was obvious because linguists could track these changes through

219
00:12:37,800 --> 00:12:41,439
Speaker 1: written sources from history. They could see for themselves how

220
00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:44,839
Speaker 1: words and usages and whole languages morphed over the centuries.

221
00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:47,840
Speaker 1: Charles Darwin actually wrote in The Descent of Man, quote

222
00:12:48,080 --> 00:12:51,920
Speaker 1: the formation of different languages and of distinct species, and

223
00:12:51,960 --> 00:12:54,760
Speaker 1: the proofs that both have been developed through the gradual

224
00:12:54,800 --> 00:12:58,880
Speaker 1: process are curiously parallel. I was reading a good article

225
00:12:58,920 --> 00:13:02,160
Speaker 1: about this by John whit Field in Plos Biology from

226
00:13:02,160 --> 00:13:04,880
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight called across the Curious parallel of

227
00:13:04,960 --> 00:13:10,040
Speaker 1: language and species evolution and uh so Whitfield's writing about

228
00:13:10,040 --> 00:13:13,040
Speaker 1: this subject and uh In addition to common ancestry and

229
00:13:13,120 --> 00:13:16,520
Speaker 1: changes to words and genes over time, another parallel that

230
00:13:16,559 --> 00:13:20,680
Speaker 1: Whitfield points out is that quote, their most important components

231
00:13:20,880 --> 00:13:25,240
Speaker 1: show the least variation. In biology, this means that genes,

232
00:13:25,280 --> 00:13:28,960
Speaker 1: such as those involved in the machinery of protein synthesis,

233
00:13:29,000 --> 00:13:32,040
Speaker 1: so basically something every organism has to do all the time,

234
00:13:32,720 --> 00:13:35,720
Speaker 1: change so slowly that they can be used to discern

235
00:13:35,760 --> 00:13:39,440
Speaker 1: the relationships of groups that diverged hundreds of millions of

236
00:13:39,520 --> 00:13:44,319
Speaker 1: years ago. Likewise, the most commonly used words, such as

237
00:13:44,480 --> 00:13:49,400
Speaker 1: numbers and pronouns, changed the most slowly. Yeah, I thought

238
00:13:49,400 --> 00:13:51,960
Speaker 1: that was really interesting. I mean, other words, you can

239
00:13:52,000 --> 00:13:55,720
Speaker 1: find other words that seem to persist in fairly stable

240
00:13:55,800 --> 00:13:58,280
Speaker 1: forms over long periods of time, and they very often

241
00:13:58,320 --> 00:14:02,679
Speaker 1: are common words. You know, words like for family relationships,

242
00:14:02,679 --> 00:14:06,319
Speaker 1: words for things like mother and father, and uh for

243
00:14:06,679 --> 00:14:09,200
Speaker 1: you know, things that would be referred to very often

244
00:14:09,320 --> 00:14:12,959
Speaker 1: in everyday speech. The whereas it's the more specific terms

245
00:14:13,000 --> 00:14:19,160
Speaker 1: that may go extinct over time right or face dramatic substitutions.

246
00:14:19,400 --> 00:14:22,840
Speaker 1: Uh So, Today more than half of the world's population

247
00:14:23,280 --> 00:14:26,720
Speaker 1: speaks a language that shares as a common ancestor and

248
00:14:26,800 --> 00:14:31,680
Speaker 1: extinct language called Indo European. One fun example I was

249
00:14:31,720 --> 00:14:34,800
Speaker 1: reading about in a Nautilus article from last year by

250
00:14:35,120 --> 00:14:39,720
Speaker 1: Sevinga Norkiya Zova was about the word honey. So, of course,

251
00:14:39,760 --> 00:14:43,960
Speaker 1: the word honey is honey in English. In Sanskrit it's madhu,

252
00:14:44,160 --> 00:14:47,800
Speaker 1: in Russian it's meod. And to bring it back to English,

253
00:14:47,880 --> 00:14:51,240
Speaker 1: we have mead, an alcoholic drink made out of honey.

254
00:14:51,280 --> 00:14:54,400
Speaker 1: In Sanskrit, Russian, and even in English you've got these

255
00:14:54,440 --> 00:14:58,120
Speaker 1: links that you know, words are still basically very similar.

256
00:14:59,240 --> 00:15:03,040
Speaker 1: Another interest in fact from that article, UH, a professor

257
00:15:03,080 --> 00:15:06,960
Speaker 1: of linguistics at New York University named Gregory Guy talks

258
00:15:06,960 --> 00:15:09,840
Speaker 1: about the word locks, which in English, of course means

259
00:15:09,880 --> 00:15:12,160
Speaker 1: you know, smoked salmon, you'd have your bagel with locks.

260
00:15:12,640 --> 00:15:16,600
Speaker 1: But apparently locks is basically the same word as it

261
00:15:16,760 --> 00:15:20,760
Speaker 1: was in proto into European eight thousand years ago, where

262
00:15:20,760 --> 00:15:24,680
Speaker 1: it was probably pronounced locks and it meant salmon like

263
00:15:24,720 --> 00:15:27,320
Speaker 1: eight thousand years ago. It's interesting to the way both

264
00:15:27,360 --> 00:15:29,960
Speaker 1: of these examples are foods. There are things that are

265
00:15:30,880 --> 00:15:33,400
Speaker 1: concepts that that that are for things that we we

266
00:15:33,480 --> 00:15:36,000
Speaker 1: not only conceive of, but we actually take into our body.

267
00:15:36,080 --> 00:15:39,600
Speaker 1: We have such a complete sensory understanding of them. Yeah,

268
00:15:39,640 --> 00:15:42,920
Speaker 1: that's an interesting point to things that would have been

269
00:15:42,960 --> 00:15:48,160
Speaker 1: delicious from ancient times. But anyway, based on this biological analogy,

270
00:15:48,960 --> 00:15:50,920
Speaker 1: I want to use an analogy for the purpose of

271
00:15:50,960 --> 00:15:54,880
Speaker 1: the rest of this episode, which is basically biological evolution

272
00:15:55,200 --> 00:16:00,400
Speaker 1: versus genetic engineering. Most new words that enter all language

273
00:16:00,480 --> 00:16:04,160
Speaker 1: do so through a process more akin to biological evolution.

274
00:16:04,280 --> 00:16:10,160
Speaker 1: They somehow arise naturally among speakers rather than as you know,

275
00:16:10,320 --> 00:16:14,680
Speaker 1: genetically engineered. You know, we we created a giant scorpion

276
00:16:14,720 --> 00:16:17,040
Speaker 1: as a government weapon or something, you know, the great

277
00:16:17,080 --> 00:16:21,160
Speaker 1: b movie plot. Um than these genetic engineering projects, and

278
00:16:21,160 --> 00:16:24,160
Speaker 1: and those would be more akin to what we're ultimately

279
00:16:24,240 --> 00:16:26,600
Speaker 1: going to focus on the attempts to create a new

280
00:16:26,640 --> 00:16:30,520
Speaker 1: word on purpose. But let's focus on the biological evolution

281
00:16:30,680 --> 00:16:35,160
Speaker 1: version first. So when language is evolved naturally, what happens

282
00:16:35,200 --> 00:16:37,840
Speaker 1: at the word to word level? Where do new words

283
00:16:37,920 --> 00:16:41,880
Speaker 1: come from if nobody is trying to coin them on purpose? Well,

284
00:16:41,880 --> 00:16:44,280
Speaker 1: of course, on our show we've we've discussed plenty of

285
00:16:44,280 --> 00:16:46,800
Speaker 1: times if you're looking to invent something new, you can

286
00:16:46,800 --> 00:16:50,800
Speaker 1: always just steal something which has already been invented. And yeah,

287
00:16:50,880 --> 00:16:54,440
Speaker 1: most inventions are just stealing ideas from other people. Uh,

288
00:16:54,440 --> 00:16:58,280
Speaker 1: and or maybe making a very slight modification. So a

289
00:16:58,400 --> 00:17:03,600
Speaker 1: very common source of new word is borrowing from existing languages. Yeah,

290
00:17:03,800 --> 00:17:06,560
Speaker 1: and these are also known as loan words. Uh. And

291
00:17:06,880 --> 00:17:09,159
Speaker 1: one one fun example of this, or at least I

292
00:17:09,200 --> 00:17:11,640
Speaker 1: find it fun. I don't know your your mileage may vary,

293
00:17:11,680 --> 00:17:16,359
Speaker 1: but um, earworm is one at all? Here? Well well,

294
00:17:16,359 --> 00:17:20,760
Speaker 1: well I'm just kidding. That's that's great. Wrong, earworms are

295
00:17:20,760 --> 00:17:24,480
Speaker 1: an example of this. Now it's technically a calic that's

296
00:17:24,520 --> 00:17:26,879
Speaker 1: suspelled c A l q u E, which is a

297
00:17:26,920 --> 00:17:30,479
Speaker 1: specialized version of this in which the original word in

298
00:17:30,480 --> 00:17:33,280
Speaker 1: another language is is. It's not just a matter of

299
00:17:33,320 --> 00:17:36,119
Speaker 1: taking the say that the German word for something and

300
00:17:36,240 --> 00:17:40,760
Speaker 1: using it. It's directly translating it literal, literally word for word.

301
00:17:41,520 --> 00:17:44,879
Speaker 1: Other examples of this would be brainwashing or Adam's apple.

302
00:17:45,359 --> 00:17:48,640
Speaker 1: But with earworm it stems from the German or verm,

303
00:17:49,119 --> 00:17:54,639
Speaker 1: which may have originated with German operetta composer Paul Linkey,

304
00:17:54,680 --> 00:17:58,439
Speaker 1: but didn't enter the popular lexicon um until like the

305
00:17:58,480 --> 00:18:02,040
Speaker 1: early two thousands. Prior to all of this, or verms

306
00:18:02,600 --> 00:18:06,800
Speaker 1: were insects of the order uh dermap tira. Ear wigs

307
00:18:07,640 --> 00:18:10,679
Speaker 1: probably named because well, there's one theory is that they

308
00:18:10,720 --> 00:18:13,240
Speaker 1: have the their hind wings are kind of ear like.

309
00:18:13,440 --> 00:18:14,840
Speaker 1: If you fold them out, they kind of look like

310
00:18:14,880 --> 00:18:18,080
Speaker 1: a human ear. But the more likely explanation is that

311
00:18:18,119 --> 00:18:21,080
Speaker 1: you have this old wives tale about them crawling into

312
00:18:21,160 --> 00:18:24,560
Speaker 1: human ears and laying eggs inside your brain, which of

313
00:18:24,600 --> 00:18:27,200
Speaker 1: course becomes part of the idea of like, what is

314
00:18:27,240 --> 00:18:29,440
Speaker 1: a song you hear and you can't get it out?

315
00:18:29,440 --> 00:18:31,480
Speaker 1: Of your head. It is kind of like a small

316
00:18:31,520 --> 00:18:34,040
Speaker 1: insect that has crawled in through your ear into your brain.

317
00:18:34,200 --> 00:18:38,080
Speaker 1: It's like those things in con Yeah exactly, but really,

318
00:18:38,119 --> 00:18:40,600
Speaker 1: your wigs don't do this, right, No, No, there's no

319
00:18:41,080 --> 00:18:45,040
Speaker 1: I think they will, uh from based on the research

320
00:18:45,080 --> 00:18:47,320
Speaker 1: I was looking at, I think they will occasionally you

321
00:18:47,320 --> 00:18:49,560
Speaker 1: can get one in your ear. I would refer back

322
00:18:49,600 --> 00:18:51,960
Speaker 1: to our stuff to Blow your mind episode which I

323
00:18:52,000 --> 00:18:56,639
Speaker 1: think will be rerunning soon, about insects crawling inside of

324
00:18:56,640 --> 00:19:00,480
Speaker 1: body cavities. It happens, it can happen, but not not

325
00:19:00,680 --> 00:19:03,520
Speaker 1: to the degree that wives tales would have you believe.

326
00:19:03,600 --> 00:19:05,879
Speaker 1: And not eggs in the brain. No, no eggs in

327
00:19:05,920 --> 00:19:08,120
Speaker 1: the brain. We need another phrase, by the way, that's

328
00:19:08,119 --> 00:19:11,240
Speaker 1: a that's an unfortunate phrase because who knows our wives

329
00:19:11,280 --> 00:19:15,080
Speaker 1: really saying this? Yeah, it is. It is sexist terminology.

330
00:19:15,440 --> 00:19:19,520
Speaker 1: Let's just say old folk beliefs and hearsay old starship

331
00:19:19,560 --> 00:19:24,359
Speaker 1: captain's tales. Um So. English itself is actually composed of

332
00:19:24,400 --> 00:19:27,119
Speaker 1: a huge number of words borrowed from other languages. And

333
00:19:27,160 --> 00:19:31,840
Speaker 1: it's not just interesting terms like earworm right. Tons of

334
00:19:31,880 --> 00:19:37,080
Speaker 1: everyday terminology is descended from words that were borrowed into English.

335
00:19:37,200 --> 00:19:41,560
Speaker 1: Hundreds of years ago. English originally was a West Germanic language,

336
00:19:41,600 --> 00:19:43,600
Speaker 1: and and these roots or where we get a lot

337
00:19:43,600 --> 00:19:47,440
Speaker 1: of the origins of common basic short words that still

338
00:19:47,480 --> 00:19:50,719
Speaker 1: exist in English today. But tons of other words in

339
00:19:50,760 --> 00:19:53,720
Speaker 1: English come from other languages. So here's one that I

340
00:19:53,800 --> 00:19:56,280
Speaker 1: was just thinking about. What do you call the album

341
00:19:56,400 --> 00:19:59,119
Speaker 1: Black Sabbath by the band Black Sabbath, on which the

342
00:19:59,160 --> 00:20:01,920
Speaker 1: song black Sabba it appears. It sounds like a trick question.

343
00:20:01,920 --> 00:20:08,080
Speaker 1: I think the answer is Black Sabbath. It's the eponymous album, right, yeah, eponymous,

344
00:20:08,119 --> 00:20:11,359
Speaker 1: But of course eponymous, that's a that's a word taken

345
00:20:11,400 --> 00:20:14,600
Speaker 1: directly from words in Greek. So that's like a Greek

346
00:20:14,680 --> 00:20:18,520
Speaker 1: loan word. In English, it means to give one's name

347
00:20:18,640 --> 00:20:21,680
Speaker 1: to um. And in a way, it's funny to try

348
00:20:21,720 --> 00:20:25,080
Speaker 1: to list words in English borrowed from other languages, because

349
00:20:25,119 --> 00:20:27,000
Speaker 1: it would make more sense, really to try to list

350
00:20:27,000 --> 00:20:31,560
Speaker 1: the words not borrowed from other languages, descending directly from

351
00:20:31,600 --> 00:20:35,880
Speaker 1: Germanic roots, because the vast majority of English words at

352
00:20:35,880 --> 00:20:39,600
Speaker 1: this point are borrowed. By some estimates, borrowed words make

353
00:20:39,680 --> 00:20:43,200
Speaker 1: up about eighty percent or more of the language, and

354
00:20:43,280 --> 00:20:45,400
Speaker 1: some of these words have been borrowed for a very

355
00:20:45,440 --> 00:20:48,480
Speaker 1: long time. Many came from languages like French and Latin

356
00:20:48,680 --> 00:20:51,760
Speaker 1: hundreds of years ago. The big point of linguistic cross

357
00:20:51,760 --> 00:20:54,280
Speaker 1: pollination here is the Norman conquest of England in the

358
00:20:54,320 --> 00:20:59,480
Speaker 1: eleventh century, where Norman French suddenly became the language of

359
00:20:59,560 --> 00:21:03,159
Speaker 1: government into the ruling class in England. And so this

360
00:21:03,240 --> 00:21:05,919
Speaker 1: legacy still exists in English today, where you have tons

361
00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:10,080
Speaker 1: of words having multiple synonyms for the same concept. Uh.

362
00:21:10,119 --> 00:21:12,600
Speaker 1: And you have a kind of like every day version

363
00:21:12,640 --> 00:21:15,600
Speaker 1: of the word that comes from Old English, and then

364
00:21:15,600 --> 00:21:18,960
Speaker 1: a more formal or official sounding version of the word

365
00:21:19,000 --> 00:21:22,360
Speaker 1: that comes from the French. So like a holdover from

366
00:21:22,359 --> 00:21:26,199
Speaker 1: a time when both languages had to exist together at

367
00:21:26,200 --> 00:21:29,199
Speaker 1: the same time and the same heads and off the

368
00:21:29,240 --> 00:21:32,200
Speaker 1: same lips. Yeah, and then the French derivative ones were

369
00:21:32,280 --> 00:21:34,800
Speaker 1: generally the ones in power, the ones with money, and

370
00:21:34,840 --> 00:21:38,679
Speaker 1: the ones with administrative authority. So uh, you get like

371
00:21:38,800 --> 00:21:42,360
Speaker 1: buy and purchase by from the old English, purchase from

372
00:21:42,359 --> 00:21:46,240
Speaker 1: the old French, where you've got dead versus deceased, dead

373
00:21:46,320 --> 00:21:49,560
Speaker 1: from the Old English, deceased from the old French. Where

374
00:21:49,600 --> 00:21:53,000
Speaker 1: you've got wild from the Old English versus savage from

375
00:21:53,000 --> 00:21:55,639
Speaker 1: the old French. But that's a wonderful point about the

376
00:21:55,680 --> 00:21:59,520
Speaker 1: idea that that or more of the language is just

377
00:21:59,680 --> 00:22:02,119
Speaker 1: word that come from other languages. It it kind of

378
00:22:02,119 --> 00:22:05,840
Speaker 1: creates this stone soup sort of scenario for English itself,

379
00:22:05,880 --> 00:22:08,800
Speaker 1: like what what is there that is not something that

380
00:22:08,920 --> 00:22:12,480
Speaker 1: was brought in to bulk up the recipe. Yeah, that's

381
00:22:12,480 --> 00:22:14,840
Speaker 1: a great metaphor. But then ultimately, I mean it gets

382
00:22:14,880 --> 00:22:19,240
Speaker 1: complicated because both Old English and Old French or Indo

383
00:22:19,280 --> 00:22:23,400
Speaker 1: European languages meaning that so while you know, modern English

384
00:22:23,600 --> 00:22:26,959
Speaker 1: has all these words that come from the French lineage

385
00:22:27,119 --> 00:22:30,920
Speaker 1: of language development, ultimately both languages are thought to come

386
00:22:30,960 --> 00:22:34,560
Speaker 1: from this hypothetical language a long time ago into European.

387
00:22:35,200 --> 00:22:38,480
Speaker 1: So they split off, they formed different lineages, they formed

388
00:22:38,600 --> 00:22:41,520
Speaker 1: different words that descended from each other, and then at

389
00:22:41,520 --> 00:22:44,640
Speaker 1: some point in history they crossed and then entered each other.

390
00:22:45,040 --> 00:22:46,760
Speaker 1: It's kind of like a scenario where if you have

391
00:22:46,880 --> 00:22:49,679
Speaker 1: like two films that come out and it both essentially

392
00:22:49,720 --> 00:22:52,520
Speaker 1: retellings of the Odyssey or the retaellings of Baiwol or

393
00:22:52,600 --> 00:22:54,879
Speaker 1: what have you, like, that's the that's in the genes

394
00:22:54,920 --> 00:22:56,800
Speaker 1: of the thing. And then but then one sort of

395
00:22:56,800 --> 00:23:02,440
Speaker 1: steals from the other, uh like that. So another common

396
00:23:02,920 --> 00:23:06,080
Speaker 1: source of words ending up in the language is words

397
00:23:06,119 --> 00:23:08,919
Speaker 1: derived from proper nouns. Something that was once the proper

398
00:23:09,040 --> 00:23:11,920
Speaker 1: name of a person or a place gets drafted into

399
00:23:11,920 --> 00:23:16,080
Speaker 1: a common word or phrase. An example here would be platonic.

400
00:23:16,240 --> 00:23:19,920
Speaker 1: Think of a platonic relationship. Now, once this was understood

401
00:23:19,920 --> 00:23:23,359
Speaker 1: to refer directly to ideas discussed by Plato, you're talking

402
00:23:23,400 --> 00:23:27,840
Speaker 1: about the philosopher Plato. Now platonic does not really necessarily

403
00:23:27,880 --> 00:23:31,040
Speaker 1: call Plato to mind. It's just an adjective, right, It

404
00:23:31,080 --> 00:23:34,560
Speaker 1: just means, like, you know, a non sexual relationship, but platonic. One.

405
00:23:34,840 --> 00:23:38,360
Speaker 1: Another example would be bohemian. Bohemia is a place. It's

406
00:23:38,359 --> 00:23:41,320
Speaker 1: in the modern Czech Republic. But now the word Bohemian

407
00:23:41,400 --> 00:23:44,560
Speaker 1: doesn't suggest to people anything about that place. So of

408
00:23:44,640 --> 00:23:48,359
Speaker 1: course we still have examples of of words that they

409
00:23:48,359 --> 00:23:52,640
Speaker 1: still have a direct tie to their source, like say Macavellian.

410
00:23:53,920 --> 00:23:56,000
Speaker 1: When someone uses maca I don't know. I tend not

411
00:23:56,119 --> 00:23:59,639
Speaker 1: define examples of people misusing it or using it in

412
00:23:59,640 --> 00:24:02,399
Speaker 1: a general sense at least yet, but you could well

413
00:24:02,480 --> 00:24:05,919
Speaker 1: imagine a future or you know, or a usage of

414
00:24:06,040 --> 00:24:09,840
Speaker 1: Macavelli and that really is completely cut off from the

415
00:24:09,880 --> 00:24:16,200
Speaker 1: original concepts. There's a good malapropism of machiavellianos where where

416
00:24:16,240 --> 00:24:20,360
Speaker 1: somebody's like, that's what Prince Macchiavelli said, but I think

417
00:24:21,080 --> 00:24:25,120
Speaker 1: he wasn't a prince. He was the prince by Machiavelli

418
00:24:25,920 --> 00:24:31,080
Speaker 1: actually just thought of another good proper name to common usage, denim.

419
00:24:31,119 --> 00:24:34,880
Speaker 1: Denim originally is like from day nime. It's like from

420
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,560
Speaker 1: a place. Oh I didn't know that. Yeah, okay, well,

421
00:24:37,600 --> 00:24:39,680
Speaker 1: oh well, as long as we're talking about about products,

422
00:24:39,720 --> 00:24:42,480
Speaker 1: I mean there's of course, Champagne is another example, right,

423
00:24:42,480 --> 00:24:44,879
Speaker 1: it's a great one where it's officially it's supposed to

424
00:24:44,920 --> 00:24:47,639
Speaker 1: be tied to the Champagne region, but it is often

425
00:24:47,680 --> 00:24:50,240
Speaker 1: just used generically. Now it's just a common now it

426
00:24:50,240 --> 00:24:53,920
Speaker 1: means bubbly wine. Yeah um yeah. But so another thing

427
00:24:54,119 --> 00:24:57,120
Speaker 1: that a great source of new words in this sort

428
00:24:57,160 --> 00:25:02,600
Speaker 1: of natural evolution version is back formation. I love this.

429
00:25:02,680 --> 00:25:06,360
Speaker 1: Back Formation is when a new word is born when

430
00:25:06,359 --> 00:25:10,639
Speaker 1: a prefix or suffix is removed from an existing word

431
00:25:11,119 --> 00:25:14,119
Speaker 1: in order to create a new one. Often because people

432
00:25:14,200 --> 00:25:18,680
Speaker 1: just assume that these new words already exist because of

433
00:25:18,800 --> 00:25:22,440
Speaker 1: linguistic cues. So people create a new word thinking it's

434
00:25:22,480 --> 00:25:26,359
Speaker 1: already a word, not realizing that it's not one. So

435
00:25:26,480 --> 00:25:30,080
Speaker 1: here's one that I really like, the verb lace, as

436
00:25:30,119 --> 00:25:33,439
Speaker 1: in to use a laser. Okay, so this is thinking like,

437
00:25:33,480 --> 00:25:35,600
Speaker 1: all right, you have the terminator. What's the terminator? Do

438
00:25:35,720 --> 00:25:39,000
Speaker 1: he terminates? What's the laser? Do lasers the heck out

439
00:25:39,000 --> 00:25:41,359
Speaker 1: of stuff? Exactly? You've got a fire poker? What do

440
00:25:41,400 --> 00:25:44,000
Speaker 1: you do with a poker? You poke? So you've got

441
00:25:44,000 --> 00:25:46,159
Speaker 1: a laser. The surgeon has a laser. What do they

442
00:25:46,160 --> 00:25:48,920
Speaker 1: do with it? They lace the patient's eye. And this

443
00:25:49,000 --> 00:25:51,000
Speaker 1: is a word. Now people use the verb lace all

444
00:25:51,040 --> 00:25:54,119
Speaker 1: the time. It's a but it is a back formation.

445
00:25:54,200 --> 00:25:57,840
Speaker 1: The word laser is not like the word poker. Laser

446
00:25:57,960 --> 00:26:02,280
Speaker 1: is actually an acronym standing for light amplification by stimulated

447
00:26:02,280 --> 00:26:06,320
Speaker 1: emission of radiation. But because of its similarity to these

448
00:26:06,320 --> 00:26:09,000
Speaker 1: other nouns with a similar spelling that end with e

449
00:26:09,200 --> 00:26:12,080
Speaker 1: er like poker, it got back formed into a verb.

450
00:26:12,880 --> 00:26:16,040
Speaker 1: And of course this example also shows another new way

451
00:26:16,080 --> 00:26:20,680
Speaker 1: that words are formed acronyms. Right, laser was originally an acronym.

452
00:26:20,800 --> 00:26:23,320
Speaker 1: Now it's not, you know it, Laser is just a word.

453
00:26:23,400 --> 00:26:26,520
Speaker 1: People don't capitalize that. They don't put periods between the letters.

454
00:26:26,920 --> 00:26:29,280
Speaker 1: It's just a laser. I was reading about another fun

455
00:26:29,359 --> 00:26:32,200
Speaker 1: back formation. This is the kind of back formation known

456
00:26:32,240 --> 00:26:35,000
Speaker 1: as a false singular. And the example here is the

457
00:26:35,040 --> 00:26:39,879
Speaker 1: English word P, as in p soup. So originally the

458
00:26:39,920 --> 00:26:43,920
Speaker 1: Middle English word was piece p E a s e

459
00:26:44,560 --> 00:26:46,520
Speaker 1: and this would be the noun that worked as a

460
00:26:46,560 --> 00:26:49,919
Speaker 1: singular or a collective, like the word corn, or like

461
00:26:49,960 --> 00:26:53,000
Speaker 1: the word wheat. So you could have a bowl of peace,

462
00:26:53,240 --> 00:26:56,439
Speaker 1: or you could have a single piece kernel. Well, because

463
00:26:56,560 --> 00:27:00,480
Speaker 1: plural words in modern English end in s sound, people

464
00:27:00,560 --> 00:27:05,680
Speaker 1: began to assume sometimes the seventeenth century that peace must

465
00:27:05,760 --> 00:27:09,680
Speaker 1: be the plural word for the singular P, and then

466
00:27:09,720 --> 00:27:13,600
Speaker 1: the word P was thus created. This type of origin again,

467
00:27:13,640 --> 00:27:16,400
Speaker 1: this is the false singular. A similar thing would happen

468
00:27:16,440 --> 00:27:20,320
Speaker 1: if people started assuming that the singular of moose must

469
00:27:20,359 --> 00:27:26,639
Speaker 1: be moo, as opposed to nieces or of course moose

470
00:27:27,400 --> 00:27:31,240
Speaker 1: another one that I really like. How about truncation also

471
00:27:31,280 --> 00:27:34,200
Speaker 1: known as shortening or clipping. This is when new words

472
00:27:34,200 --> 00:27:37,280
Speaker 1: are created by cutting chunks out of existing words. So

473
00:27:37,440 --> 00:27:44,320
Speaker 1: mayonnaise becomes mayo, examination becomes exam, refrigerator becomes fridge, robot

474
00:27:44,400 --> 00:27:50,119
Speaker 1: becomes bot, application becomes app advertisement, becomes ad. Yeah, we

475
00:27:50,160 --> 00:27:53,879
Speaker 1: also see stuff like bicycle and bike, rhinoceros and rhino

476
00:27:54,119 --> 00:27:58,760
Speaker 1: or brother becomes bro or bra. One of my favorites.

477
00:27:59,080 --> 00:28:00,960
Speaker 1: That also the one that I think it's I find

478
00:28:01,119 --> 00:28:05,040
Speaker 1: just so humorous is um when pizza becomes za. I

479
00:28:05,040 --> 00:28:07,399
Speaker 1: don't know if actual humans use this or if it's

480
00:28:07,440 --> 00:28:11,000
Speaker 1: just like Ninja turtles, but uh, I like to bust

481
00:28:11,040 --> 00:28:13,879
Speaker 1: it out for groans now and again, never pay for

482
00:28:13,960 --> 00:28:18,760
Speaker 1: la pizza man. Uh. Here's another one blending existing words,

483
00:28:18,960 --> 00:28:22,200
Speaker 1: pretty straightforward. You take incomplete parts of words and smash

484
00:28:22,280 --> 00:28:26,520
Speaker 1: them together. Breakfast and lunch becomes brunch, Spoon and fork

485
00:28:26,680 --> 00:28:30,720
Speaker 1: becomes spork. Podcast itself, we're on a podcast that is

486
00:28:30,720 --> 00:28:35,440
Speaker 1: a portmanteau of iPod and broadcast, and some would classify

487
00:28:35,600 --> 00:28:39,880
Speaker 1: this particular podcast as infotainment, which is of course a

488
00:28:39,920 --> 00:28:45,400
Speaker 1: combination of information and entertainment. So you got a lot

489
00:28:45,400 --> 00:28:48,680
Speaker 1: of fun a portmanteau from hell. Yeah, you see a

490
00:28:48,720 --> 00:28:50,520
Speaker 1: lot of this in You know, a place where you

491
00:28:50,520 --> 00:28:53,080
Speaker 1: see a lot of language generation is the business world,

492
00:28:54,120 --> 00:28:56,080
Speaker 1: where you know you have a new product or a

493
00:28:56,080 --> 00:28:58,320
Speaker 1: new approach. It needs a new title and needs a

494
00:28:58,320 --> 00:29:00,840
Speaker 1: new a new word for this. On sept And A

495
00:29:00,880 --> 00:29:02,720
Speaker 1: great way to create it is to just crash two

496
00:29:02,720 --> 00:29:08,520
Speaker 1: things together and see how they fit. Are you not infota? Okay?

497
00:29:08,560 --> 00:29:12,000
Speaker 1: One more natural source of new words on amotopia. This

498
00:29:12,040 --> 00:29:13,840
Speaker 1: is what we call it when a word is formed

499
00:29:13,920 --> 00:29:17,360
Speaker 1: by sounding like the thing it's referring to. So plink

500
00:29:17,760 --> 00:29:22,400
Speaker 1: honk hiss, the word imitates the sound of the concept.

501
00:29:22,880 --> 00:29:24,880
Speaker 1: I was trying to think do we form new on

502
00:29:25,000 --> 00:29:27,120
Speaker 1: a mootopias this It seems like all the ones I

503
00:29:27,160 --> 00:29:29,600
Speaker 1: can think of have been around for a while. Maybe

504
00:29:29,680 --> 00:29:32,600
Speaker 1: we form them less often than some other types of words,

505
00:29:32,600 --> 00:29:35,000
Speaker 1: but I'm sure we must form new ones every now

506
00:29:35,040 --> 00:29:36,720
Speaker 1: and then. I was trying to think of a good

507
00:29:36,760 --> 00:29:39,480
Speaker 1: modern example, and the one I thought of was I'll

508
00:29:39,520 --> 00:29:43,680
Speaker 1: ping you about that later. So originally an automotopia from

509
00:29:43,680 --> 00:29:46,120
Speaker 1: the nineteenth century, this would, you know, refer to the

510
00:29:46,120 --> 00:29:49,240
Speaker 1: sound of a bullet hitting metal or something ping, But

511
00:29:49,320 --> 00:29:53,040
Speaker 1: because of conceptual or auditory similarities, it came to refer

512
00:29:53,120 --> 00:29:56,560
Speaker 1: to things in the communications sphere, such as like a

513
00:29:56,600 --> 00:30:02,280
Speaker 1: sonar communications between submarines or between network computer user. Yeah. Um,

514
00:30:02,360 --> 00:30:05,400
Speaker 1: and I would be surprised if the modern resurgence of

515
00:30:05,560 --> 00:30:08,880
Speaker 1: ping in the business world or in the workplace didn't

516
00:30:08,920 --> 00:30:12,960
Speaker 1: have something to do with the ping like notification sounds

517
00:30:13,000 --> 00:30:16,720
Speaker 1: and email and chat apps. Uh. Yeah, I was trying

518
00:30:16,760 --> 00:30:19,000
Speaker 1: to think of some more like some recent ones, and

519
00:30:19,040 --> 00:30:22,280
Speaker 1: I was looking around at some examples of sort of

520
00:30:22,320 --> 00:30:26,960
Speaker 1: modern lingo, and perhaps yeat is an example. I'm not

521
00:30:27,040 --> 00:30:30,920
Speaker 1: sure what does that? What does that imitate? The sound of? Well? Okay,

522
00:30:30,920 --> 00:30:33,920
Speaker 1: well let me define it for anyone so as the

523
00:30:34,320 --> 00:30:37,000
Speaker 1: kids will use this term these days. According to uh,

524
00:30:37,200 --> 00:30:39,720
Speaker 1: to my sources on the internet, it seems to be

525
00:30:39,760 --> 00:30:43,120
Speaker 1: either a strong version of yes or to quote, throw

526
00:30:43,360 --> 00:30:47,680
Speaker 1: something forcefully in a specified direction, as in I yeeded

527
00:30:47,720 --> 00:30:51,480
Speaker 1: a cup of noodles across the room. Yeah, but like heat,

528
00:30:51,640 --> 00:30:53,400
Speaker 1: like I can sort of, I'm not sure. I'm not

529
00:30:54,320 --> 00:30:57,520
Speaker 1: positive that there's any um in anything to it, Like

530
00:30:57,560 --> 00:31:00,520
Speaker 1: to throw something doesn't necessarily create the sound of yeat.

531
00:31:00,840 --> 00:31:03,600
Speaker 1: But then when you start like trying to figure out

532
00:31:03,640 --> 00:31:06,640
Speaker 1: how the sounds work in your head, you know, I

533
00:31:06,640 --> 00:31:09,800
Speaker 1: can sort of half formulate a case for yeat being

534
00:31:09,800 --> 00:31:12,640
Speaker 1: an actual sound. God, we sound so cool right now.

535
00:31:13,680 --> 00:31:15,600
Speaker 1: I'll have to keep thinking about that one. Think about

536
00:31:15,600 --> 00:31:18,480
Speaker 1: it the next time you throw something across the ring. Okay, alright,

537
00:31:18,680 --> 00:31:20,880
Speaker 1: on that note, We're going to take one more break,

538
00:31:20,920 --> 00:31:23,120
Speaker 1: but when we come back we will dive into some

539
00:31:23,240 --> 00:31:34,280
Speaker 1: examples of intentionally invented words. All right, we're back. Okay.

540
00:31:34,320 --> 00:31:36,840
Speaker 1: Now we've been looking at ways that words arise in

541
00:31:36,960 --> 00:31:41,120
Speaker 1: language without being intentionally invented. When they arise through the process,

542
00:31:41,240 --> 00:31:43,960
Speaker 1: that's more akin to biological evolution. But what about when

543
00:31:43,960 --> 00:31:46,760
Speaker 1: we want to frankenstein some words just like make them

544
00:31:46,760 --> 00:31:49,680
Speaker 1: in the lab um. So sort of going back to

545
00:31:49,720 --> 00:31:52,520
Speaker 1: the business scenario, you've got a new product that you

546
00:31:52,560 --> 00:31:54,680
Speaker 1: need to get out there, or you're rebranding another one

547
00:31:54,680 --> 00:31:57,640
Speaker 1: and you gotta call it something. Well, I know somebody

548
00:31:57,680 --> 00:31:59,840
Speaker 1: who would have been great at branding, and that's the

549
00:32:00,000 --> 00:32:04,360
Speaker 1: English writer Horace Walpole, who lived from seventeen seventeen to

550
00:32:04,440 --> 00:32:09,480
Speaker 1: seventeen uh And the term that he coined that everybody knows.

551
00:32:09,520 --> 00:32:11,880
Speaker 1: He actually coined quite a few, but most of them

552
00:32:11,920 --> 00:32:16,320
Speaker 1: are forgotten. The one that everybody knows is serendipity. And

553
00:32:16,400 --> 00:32:19,360
Speaker 1: this comes from a letter that Walpole was writing to

554
00:32:19,680 --> 00:32:24,080
Speaker 1: a friend named Horace Man, different from the American education reformer.

555
00:32:24,120 --> 00:32:27,720
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure I think this Horseman was a British diplomat.

556
00:32:28,240 --> 00:32:33,000
Speaker 1: But the letter was dated January seventeen fifty four. And

557
00:32:33,160 --> 00:32:37,200
Speaker 1: despite the magical delight of serendipity as a concept, I

558
00:32:37,240 --> 00:32:39,239
Speaker 1: have to say the occasion by which he ends up

559
00:32:39,280 --> 00:32:44,320
Speaker 1: describing it is incredibly dull. Basically, Walpole says that he

560
00:32:44,440 --> 00:32:48,959
Speaker 1: accidentally discovered a historical link between two families while he

561
00:32:49,000 --> 00:32:52,000
Speaker 1: was studying their coats of arms in a reference book.

562
00:32:52,880 --> 00:32:56,920
Speaker 1: Earth shaking right. But he's writing about this process, and

563
00:32:56,960 --> 00:33:00,600
Speaker 1: he says, quote, this discovery indeed is almost of that

564
00:33:00,680 --> 00:33:04,640
Speaker 1: kind which I call serendipity, a very expressive word, which,

565
00:33:04,720 --> 00:33:06,800
Speaker 1: as I have nothing better to tell you, I shall

566
00:33:06,880 --> 00:33:10,040
Speaker 1: endeavor to explain to you. You will understand it better

567
00:33:10,080 --> 00:33:13,120
Speaker 1: by the derivation than the definition. I once read a

568
00:33:13,200 --> 00:33:17,240
Speaker 1: silly fairy tale called the Three Princes of serendip As

569
00:33:17,280 --> 00:33:21,320
Speaker 1: their highnesses traveled, they were always making discoveries by accidents

570
00:33:21,360 --> 00:33:24,840
Speaker 1: and sagacity of things which they were not in quest of.

571
00:33:25,240 --> 00:33:28,520
Speaker 1: For instance, one of them discovered that a mule blind

572
00:33:28,600 --> 00:33:32,000
Speaker 1: of the right eye had traveled the same road lately,

573
00:33:32,280 --> 00:33:35,360
Speaker 1: because the grass was eaten only on the left side,

574
00:33:35,440 --> 00:33:38,000
Speaker 1: where it was worse than on the right. Now do

575
00:33:38,080 --> 00:33:42,520
Speaker 1: you understand serendipity. One of the most remarkable instances of

576
00:33:42,520 --> 00:33:46,800
Speaker 1: this accidental sagacity, for you must observe that no discovery

577
00:33:46,840 --> 00:33:49,480
Speaker 1: of a thing you were looking for comes under this description.

578
00:33:50,000 --> 00:33:53,320
Speaker 1: Was of my Lord Shaftsbury, who, happening to dine at

579
00:33:53,360 --> 00:33:57,040
Speaker 1: Lord Chancellor Clarendon's, found out the marriage of the Duke

580
00:33:57,080 --> 00:34:00,000
Speaker 1: of York and Mrs Hyde by the respect with which

581
00:34:00,040 --> 00:34:03,840
Speaker 1: her mother treated her at table god riveting right dinner.

582
00:34:04,120 --> 00:34:08,600
Speaker 1: How he treated her. Oh man, it's it's hard to

583
00:34:08,600 --> 00:34:12,640
Speaker 1: believe the term really took off at all reading this,

584
00:34:12,920 --> 00:34:15,080
Speaker 1: but it's a great term, right, because it really does

585
00:34:15,200 --> 00:34:17,920
Speaker 1: describe something, the idea of a happy accident, that the

586
00:34:18,040 --> 00:34:22,400
Speaker 1: occurrence or development of events by a thing that was,

587
00:34:22,480 --> 00:34:24,600
Speaker 1: you know, in a way that's beneficial, but that was

588
00:34:24,640 --> 00:34:27,560
Speaker 1: not intended by the agent. Yeah, like when you run

589
00:34:27,560 --> 00:34:30,799
Speaker 1: into an old friend at a subway on a subway ride,

590
00:34:30,880 --> 00:34:33,960
Speaker 1: you think this is exactly like a one eyed donkey

591
00:34:34,080 --> 00:34:38,640
Speaker 1: eating grass on one side of the road. I think something,

592
00:34:38,840 --> 00:34:41,080
Speaker 1: at least in the way I use the word. It's

593
00:34:41,160 --> 00:34:45,200
Speaker 1: especially serendipitous if it's um a situation in which you know,

594
00:34:45,320 --> 00:34:47,799
Speaker 1: in the course of trying to do one thing, especially

595
00:34:47,840 --> 00:34:52,200
Speaker 1: if that thing is foolish or misguided, you actually accomplish

596
00:34:52,320 --> 00:34:56,480
Speaker 1: something different and good. Yes, it's like the foolishness of

597
00:34:56,520 --> 00:35:01,440
Speaker 1: the original errand that makes something especially serendipitous. But according

598
00:35:01,480 --> 00:35:03,799
Speaker 1: to a post that excerpted from this letter in the

599
00:35:03,800 --> 00:35:07,960
Speaker 1: Paris Review, the adjective form of the word serendipitous was

600
00:35:08,040 --> 00:35:12,320
Speaker 1: not recorded until nineteen forty three. So that's a pretty

601
00:35:12,320 --> 00:35:16,480
Speaker 1: big spend of time. And I wonder do intentionally invented

602
00:35:16,480 --> 00:35:19,279
Speaker 1: words take longer on average to find all of their

603
00:35:19,320 --> 00:35:21,960
Speaker 1: derived parts of speech. I don't know. I mean, it

604
00:35:22,719 --> 00:35:24,319
Speaker 1: seems like they have to have a certain amount of

605
00:35:24,320 --> 00:35:27,520
Speaker 1: sticking power to just like language is a living thing,

606
00:35:27,640 --> 00:35:31,239
Speaker 1: you know. Um, so if you create a word and

607
00:35:31,280 --> 00:35:34,480
Speaker 1: it doesn't take off, you know, if someone's out there

608
00:35:34,520 --> 00:35:36,960
Speaker 1: not making it happen, like pushing it into the into

609
00:35:36,960 --> 00:35:41,000
Speaker 1: the lexicon, Yeah, how does it ever gain a foothold? Well?

610
00:35:41,000 --> 00:35:43,600
Speaker 1: I think about the fact that when a word feels organic,

611
00:35:43,719 --> 00:35:47,200
Speaker 1: you're more likely to assume that it's derived different parts

612
00:35:47,239 --> 00:35:50,560
Speaker 1: of speech already exist, right, that you're not making them

613
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:53,560
Speaker 1: up when you say them, Whereas when a word is

614
00:35:53,800 --> 00:35:57,920
Speaker 1: something that you're aware of, as like an intentional recent coinage,

615
00:35:58,360 --> 00:36:01,640
Speaker 1: you might be more likely to think, oh, serendipitous that's

616
00:36:01,680 --> 00:36:04,080
Speaker 1: not a word. This is also probably the struggling point

617
00:36:04,120 --> 00:36:06,440
Speaker 1: for ZA. Right. That's why why I think that I

618
00:36:06,440 --> 00:36:08,040
Speaker 1: could be wrong that I don't think a lot of

619
00:36:08,040 --> 00:36:11,600
Speaker 1: people are using ZA as an abbreviation for pizza just

620
00:36:11,640 --> 00:36:15,360
Speaker 1: because it's it's It sounds fake, it doesn't seem helpful. Okay.

621
00:36:15,680 --> 00:36:19,640
Speaker 1: So Walpole also provides early written evidence for some other terms,

622
00:36:19,640 --> 00:36:22,759
Speaker 1: though not necessarily always of his intentional coinage. When I

623
00:36:22,800 --> 00:36:25,719
Speaker 1: was reading about that I thought was great is from

624
00:36:25,719 --> 00:36:28,839
Speaker 1: an article in The New Republic by David Crystal that's

625
00:36:28,880 --> 00:36:32,319
Speaker 1: all about terms for drunkenness in English. A lot of

626
00:36:32,320 --> 00:36:36,200
Speaker 1: these are forgotten, and this term comes from Walpole. The

627
00:36:36,320 --> 00:36:41,439
Speaker 1: term is muckibus, meaning drunkenly sentimental, which is a good

628
00:36:41,440 --> 00:36:43,040
Speaker 1: thing to have a word for, right, like you know,

629
00:36:43,120 --> 00:36:46,480
Speaker 1: I love you man, No, I love you man. Muckibus

630
00:36:46,800 --> 00:36:49,120
Speaker 1: uh sounds a little bit like sucky bus too, so

631
00:36:49,200 --> 00:36:52,200
Speaker 1: it has this kind of like demonic of quality to

632
00:36:52,280 --> 00:36:54,960
Speaker 1: it as well of the of the will being overpowered.

633
00:36:55,080 --> 00:36:58,480
Speaker 1: Would you believe that this word comes from a dinner party.

634
00:37:00,239 --> 00:37:02,879
Speaker 1: So it's an anecdote that Walpole shares in a letter

635
00:37:02,960 --> 00:37:07,600
Speaker 1: to George Montague on April seventeen, fifty six, Walpole says,

636
00:37:07,800 --> 00:37:10,400
Speaker 1: so he's at a dinner party, he's having supper. He

637
00:37:10,560 --> 00:37:14,680
Speaker 1: overhears somebody named Lady Coventry saying that if she drank anymore,

638
00:37:14,840 --> 00:37:18,920
Speaker 1: she would become mucky buss. And then somebody named lady

639
00:37:19,040 --> 00:37:22,920
Speaker 1: Mary Coke asks what that means, and Coventry says that

640
00:37:22,960 --> 00:37:27,920
Speaker 1: it was Irish for sentimental. Crystal writes quote. The mock

641
00:37:28,120 --> 00:37:33,240
Speaker 1: Latin ending is known from other facetious eighteenth century slang formations,

642
00:37:33,280 --> 00:37:38,160
Speaker 1: such as stinky buss, but there is no obvious connection

643
00:37:38,239 --> 00:37:42,360
Speaker 1: with muck. Lady Coventry came from Ireland. The likelihood is

644
00:37:42,360 --> 00:37:47,319
Speaker 1: that Walpole misheard a genuine Irish word, perhaps, and here

645
00:37:47,360 --> 00:37:49,520
Speaker 1: I'm gonna do my best with an Irish word here

646
00:37:50,000 --> 00:37:53,759
Speaker 1: queen yuck, which is spelled m A O I t

647
00:37:54,239 --> 00:37:58,040
Speaker 1: h n e a c h Ireland to get it together.

648
00:37:58,160 --> 00:38:03,319
Speaker 1: Come on, that's okay. I think it's ween yuck uh,

649
00:38:03,400 --> 00:38:06,600
Speaker 1: and it means sentimental. Yeah, I should say. Crystal's article

650
00:38:06,680 --> 00:38:09,560
Speaker 1: also mentions a bunch of other terms for drunkenness, including

651
00:38:09,560 --> 00:38:12,560
Speaker 1: my new favorite uh not a loan word, not a

652
00:38:12,560 --> 00:38:16,800
Speaker 1: new coinage, a classic Anglo Saxon word which is sim

653
00:38:16,960 --> 00:38:20,919
Speaker 1: bell goal, meaning wanton with drink feasting. This one also

654
00:38:21,040 --> 00:38:24,319
Speaker 1: sounds demonic in nature, which is I went to the

655
00:38:24,320 --> 00:38:28,040
Speaker 1: Black Sabbath and I became Simon bell goal. Thinking about

656
00:38:28,080 --> 00:38:31,480
Speaker 1: serendipity though, actually got me on the subject of another

657
00:38:31,600 --> 00:38:34,360
Speaker 1: invented word that I really like. That comes from the

658
00:38:34,400 --> 00:38:39,640
Speaker 1: American philosopher Daniel Dinnett, and it's his concept of a deepity.

659
00:38:39,719 --> 00:38:41,520
Speaker 1: I think we've talked about this on Stuff to Blow

660
00:38:41,560 --> 00:38:44,799
Speaker 1: your Mind before, but I read about this idea in

661
00:38:44,880 --> 00:38:48,440
Speaker 1: Dinnett's book called Intuition, Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking,

662
00:38:48,960 --> 00:38:54,080
Speaker 1: remember discussing that. So a deepity is a special kind

663
00:38:54,160 --> 00:38:58,120
Speaker 1: of equivocation. And of course equivocation is a word or

664
00:38:58,120 --> 00:39:00,600
Speaker 1: phrase that's used in two different way as to a

665
00:39:00,680 --> 00:39:04,439
Speaker 1: misleading effect. So you might say, like, um, why would

666
00:39:04,480 --> 00:39:07,439
Speaker 1: you read all the arguments for and against Dennett's theory

667
00:39:07,440 --> 00:39:12,000
Speaker 1: of consciousness? Isn't there enough arguing in the world? You know, uh,

668
00:39:12,360 --> 00:39:14,440
Speaker 1: people people say stuff like this all the time, you

669
00:39:14,480 --> 00:39:17,640
Speaker 1: know it hinges on two different meanings of the word argument.

670
00:39:17,680 --> 00:39:20,480
Speaker 1: In one sense, an argument is just explaining why you

671
00:39:20,480 --> 00:39:23,440
Speaker 1: think something's true. In another sense, it means like angry

672
00:39:23,560 --> 00:39:27,640
Speaker 1: or acrimonious. So so that's an equivocation. Generally, a deepity

673
00:39:27,719 --> 00:39:31,719
Speaker 1: is a specific kind of equivocation that you'll probably recognize

674
00:39:31,760 --> 00:39:34,840
Speaker 1: immediately from your life. It's a statement that can either

675
00:39:34,960 --> 00:39:40,759
Speaker 1: be interpreted as true and utterly trivial or profound and

676
00:39:40,960 --> 00:39:46,239
Speaker 1: obviously false. Okay, but it but it takes advantage of

677
00:39:46,280 --> 00:39:49,200
Speaker 1: like the good haves of both of these versions. So

678
00:39:49,239 --> 00:39:52,359
Speaker 1: an example would be if somebody says love is just

679
00:39:52,480 --> 00:39:57,600
Speaker 1: a word. So either you're talking about the word love,

680
00:39:57,880 --> 00:40:00,520
Speaker 1: in which case this statement is true, but it is

681
00:40:00,560 --> 00:40:04,080
Speaker 1: a banal truism and doesn't okay, so what, Yes, the

682
00:40:04,120 --> 00:40:06,960
Speaker 1: word love is a word, or you're saying that the

683
00:40:07,080 --> 00:40:10,480
Speaker 1: feeling of love is itself nothing more than a word,

684
00:40:11,040 --> 00:40:14,520
Speaker 1: in which case the statement is stupid and nobody would

685
00:40:14,560 --> 00:40:19,040
Speaker 1: bother paying any attention to you. There was I want

686
00:40:19,040 --> 00:40:21,920
Speaker 1: to say on burto echo wrote something about or I

687
00:40:21,920 --> 00:40:24,640
Speaker 1: can't remember if you wrote it or quoted it about

688
00:40:24,800 --> 00:40:28,280
Speaker 1: some uh some some treatment on the on the rose

689
00:40:28,920 --> 00:40:31,000
Speaker 1: uh saying like the first person to make this statement

690
00:40:31,120 --> 00:40:33,319
Speaker 1: was quite possibly a genius and the second person to

691
00:40:33,360 --> 00:40:36,520
Speaker 1: make it was an idiot. Um oh was he talking

692
00:40:36,520 --> 00:40:39,400
Speaker 1: about nominalism though? With William Vacham in the name of

693
00:40:39,400 --> 00:40:41,839
Speaker 1: the likely so, but yeah, it was. It was from

694
00:40:41,920 --> 00:40:43,799
Speaker 1: I want to say it was from the introduction or

695
00:40:43,880 --> 00:40:46,960
Speaker 1: the the afterword to the name of the rose, but

696
00:40:47,000 --> 00:40:48,960
Speaker 1: it's since been whilst I've read that. Well, I mean,

697
00:40:49,000 --> 00:40:51,760
Speaker 1: I guess. Another thing that's true is like with any statement,

698
00:40:51,840 --> 00:40:55,000
Speaker 1: even an obviously stupid one, with enough effort, you can

699
00:40:55,040 --> 00:40:57,640
Speaker 1: find something that that might be true about it a

700
00:40:57,719 --> 00:41:02,360
Speaker 1: way of interpreting it, or if the the actor reciting

701
00:41:02,360 --> 00:41:05,680
Speaker 1: the line is skilled enough, it can seem a lot

702
00:41:05,719 --> 00:41:08,800
Speaker 1: more profound than it is, and you can be like, oh, man, yeah,

703
00:41:09,200 --> 00:41:12,400
Speaker 1: love is just a word. I just heard Benedict Cumberbatch

704
00:41:12,480 --> 00:41:17,000
Speaker 1: say it, and I'm feeling it hardcore. Right, It's totally different.

705
00:41:17,120 --> 00:41:19,799
Speaker 1: Brian Cox could say it and I'd be like, oh,

706
00:41:19,840 --> 00:41:22,520
Speaker 1: he's right. But if it's the actor who plays Badger

707
00:41:22,600 --> 00:41:27,080
Speaker 1: on Breaking Bad, different story, entirely right. In fact, love

708
00:41:27,160 --> 00:41:28,799
Speaker 1: is just a word is a great example because you

709
00:41:28,800 --> 00:41:32,359
Speaker 1: can make tons of deepities with the X is just

710
00:41:32,480 --> 00:41:35,640
Speaker 1: a y formulation. Lots of them are like this one

711
00:41:35,640 --> 00:41:38,239
Speaker 1: example that we thankfully hear a lot less of than

712
00:41:38,239 --> 00:41:40,600
Speaker 1: we used to. Like ten years ago, this was everywhere

713
00:41:40,600 --> 00:41:44,319
Speaker 1: you looked. Evolution is just a theory. Remember this one.

714
00:41:44,880 --> 00:41:48,120
Speaker 1: So it hinges on two different understandings of the word theory.

715
00:41:48,280 --> 00:41:52,080
Speaker 1: One interpretation of the sentence is true but trivial. Another

716
00:41:52,160 --> 00:41:55,440
Speaker 1: interpretation of the sentence, where theory means something like unfounded

717
00:41:55,480 --> 00:41:58,759
Speaker 1: speculation would up end all of modern biology if it

718
00:41:58,800 --> 00:42:02,279
Speaker 1: were true, but his pat ly false. Yeah, it does.

719
00:42:02,600 --> 00:42:06,480
Speaker 1: That statement does tend to hinge on misunderstanding of what

720
00:42:06,600 --> 00:42:09,120
Speaker 1: theories are and what role they play in our understanding

721
00:42:09,120 --> 00:42:12,439
Speaker 1: of the world. Other things are not quite as obvious

722
00:42:12,480 --> 00:42:15,680
Speaker 1: as a deepity, but feel vaguely deepity ish one that

723
00:42:15,760 --> 00:42:18,520
Speaker 1: I was, one that I came across. His beauty is

724
00:42:18,560 --> 00:42:21,600
Speaker 1: only skin deep like. In one sense, this could be

725
00:42:21,680 --> 00:42:24,840
Speaker 1: saying physical beauty is only physical, which is true but

726
00:42:24,960 --> 00:42:28,399
Speaker 1: not very profound. Or it could be saying beauty has

727
00:42:28,480 --> 00:42:32,040
Speaker 1: nothing to do with transcendent qualities like morality or character,

728
00:42:32,160 --> 00:42:34,920
Speaker 1: in which case is that true, like don't we often

729
00:42:34,960 --> 00:42:39,040
Speaker 1: find things beautiful because they're morally good or thoughtful or meaningful? Yeah.

730
00:42:39,120 --> 00:42:41,719
Speaker 1: Depending on how you interpret it, it it it could mean

731
00:42:41,800 --> 00:42:45,480
Speaker 1: one of two, just dramatically different ideas, and the sense

732
00:42:45,480 --> 00:42:49,040
Speaker 1: in which it is obviously true doesn't really mean anything

733
00:42:49,560 --> 00:42:52,160
Speaker 1: I noticed in the real world. Deepity is often shoot

734
00:42:52,239 --> 00:42:54,560
Speaker 1: by you real fast. They tend to be the kind

735
00:42:54,560 --> 00:42:57,080
Speaker 1: of thing that somebody doesn't just say and leave hanging,

736
00:42:57,120 --> 00:43:00,040
Speaker 1: but they say and then move on from You know,

737
00:43:00,120 --> 00:43:03,200
Speaker 1: they're talking very quickly, like they can sound good for

738
00:43:03,280 --> 00:43:06,040
Speaker 1: half a second if you don't stop to think about them.

739
00:43:06,080 --> 00:43:09,680
Speaker 1: But I was also thinking about deepity is interesting because

740
00:43:09,719 --> 00:43:12,920
Speaker 1: there's something about the way the words sounds that was

741
00:43:12,960 --> 00:43:17,360
Speaker 1: clearly part of the selection process for attaching this word

742
00:43:17,400 --> 00:43:20,680
Speaker 1: to this concept like uh. Originally, Dinntt says that the

743
00:43:20,719 --> 00:43:23,279
Speaker 1: word was coined by a daughter of a friend of his.

744
00:43:24,400 --> 00:43:27,520
Speaker 1: Her name is Miriam Wisenbaum, and originally she had been

745
00:43:27,520 --> 00:43:30,839
Speaker 1: at the dinner table sort of like lightly mocking her

746
00:43:30,880 --> 00:43:34,359
Speaker 1: father for some kind of kind of overly ponderous thing.

747
00:43:34,360 --> 00:43:38,080
Speaker 1: He said uh. And then Dinnett heard this word from

748
00:43:38,080 --> 00:43:40,960
Speaker 1: her and then reimagined it because of the sound of

749
00:43:41,000 --> 00:43:42,920
Speaker 1: the word fits so well with the concept that he

750
00:43:42,960 --> 00:43:46,359
Speaker 1: wanted a word for uh. And it brings to mind

751
00:43:46,400 --> 00:43:49,560
Speaker 1: the concept of idiophones, which we explored on an episode

752
00:43:49,600 --> 00:43:52,520
Speaker 1: of Stuff to Blow Your Mind. Basically, the idea that uh,

753
00:43:52,760 --> 00:43:57,080
Speaker 1: certain um syllables and words sounds in our in our

754
00:43:57,120 --> 00:44:02,120
Speaker 1: minds are naturally widely associated with with concepts such as

755
00:44:02,120 --> 00:44:06,520
Speaker 1: physical textures, like there are words that naturally sound slimy

756
00:44:06,600 --> 00:44:09,920
Speaker 1: to us or have certain kind of moral connotations to

757
00:44:10,040 --> 00:44:14,839
Speaker 1: us that are just like sounds totally apart from semantic meaning, right, Yeah.

758
00:44:15,200 --> 00:44:17,160
Speaker 1: You often see this in the like the names of

759
00:44:17,200 --> 00:44:21,920
Speaker 1: fictitious characters. Um. Part of this is is we've been

760
00:44:21,960 --> 00:44:25,440
Speaker 1: on a Harry Potter kick at the house and so

761
00:44:25,560 --> 00:44:28,080
Speaker 1: like a lot of the names that J. K. Rowling uses,

762
00:44:28,480 --> 00:44:30,520
Speaker 1: you know that, I feel feel like they line up

763
00:44:30,520 --> 00:44:34,280
Speaker 1: with this rather well. You know, like uh um, several

764
00:44:34,440 --> 00:44:39,120
Speaker 1: snape you know, that's just it drips it. It feels

765
00:44:39,160 --> 00:44:42,040
Speaker 1: and sounds like the the the individual it is. It

766
00:44:42,160 --> 00:44:46,000
Speaker 1: hisses like a Slytherin, Yeah, Slytherin itself exactly. Yeah. But

767
00:44:46,120 --> 00:44:48,719
Speaker 1: I mean there is something going on here. I think like,

768
00:44:48,719 --> 00:44:51,680
Speaker 1: if you're not building a neologism entirely out of root

769
00:44:51,719 --> 00:44:54,520
Speaker 1: words that have semantic meanings, I mean, it's a different

770
00:44:54,520 --> 00:44:58,239
Speaker 1: thing to go with, like malapropism, where that's built out

771
00:44:58,239 --> 00:45:01,040
Speaker 1: of root words from another language age that have some

772
00:45:01,160 --> 00:45:04,320
Speaker 1: kind of meaning already. You wouldn't be able to tell

773
00:45:04,480 --> 00:45:08,239
Speaker 1: what deepity means just by looking at the word right right,

774
00:45:08,320 --> 00:45:11,359
Speaker 1: It doesn't doesn't have a semantic suggestion unless you've heard

775
00:45:11,360 --> 00:45:13,960
Speaker 1: it explain to you or heard it used. So to

776
00:45:14,040 --> 00:45:18,239
Speaker 1: what extent is possible Idiophonic residue guide the choice of

777
00:45:18,360 --> 00:45:21,719
Speaker 1: words being linked to concepts like that. I mean, I'm

778
00:45:21,760 --> 00:45:24,600
Speaker 1: thinking about it in my head itty deep bitty, the

779
00:45:24,760 --> 00:45:29,040
Speaker 1: itty part of it somehow sounds like the concept to me,

780
00:45:29,280 --> 00:45:32,640
Speaker 1: what brings to mind itty biddy, It brings it mind smallness,

781
00:45:32,680 --> 00:45:36,640
Speaker 1: So it's like a small small depth. But it like

782
00:45:37,040 --> 00:45:39,400
Speaker 1: that's kind of a stretch. It's not there's nothing you

783
00:45:39,440 --> 00:45:43,880
Speaker 1: can't really get there by analyzing actual grammar, right because

784
00:45:43,920 --> 00:45:46,840
Speaker 1: itty bitty is itty bitty even in Webster's I don't know,

785
00:45:46,960 --> 00:45:51,279
Speaker 1: it's it's very much slang. Uh, it's bits. I'm not

786
00:45:51,320 --> 00:45:53,960
Speaker 1: even sure where that comes from, itty bitty, I don't

787
00:45:54,000 --> 00:46:00,480
Speaker 1: know deepitty, just in terms of in examples of have

788
00:46:00,560 --> 00:46:04,280
Speaker 1: invented terminology. Uh, this is what I was thinking about recently.

789
00:46:04,480 --> 00:46:07,920
Speaker 1: Psychonaut because when you when you hear it, I mean

790
00:46:07,960 --> 00:46:09,680
Speaker 1: it's composed out of the out of the Greek. So

791
00:46:09,800 --> 00:46:12,000
Speaker 1: you it's easy to assume that this has been with

792
00:46:12,120 --> 00:46:15,920
Speaker 1: us a very long time, but it is more like malapropism,

793
00:46:15,920 --> 00:46:18,080
Speaker 1: and that it's built out of roots that do have

794
00:46:18,239 --> 00:46:21,600
Speaker 1: meanings that you could identify. Yes, yeah, because I clearly

795
00:46:21,880 --> 00:46:25,200
Speaker 1: it's drawing from the popular use of say astronaut, which

796
00:46:25,239 --> 00:46:28,879
Speaker 1: means star sailor or cosmonaut, universe sailor. And of course

797
00:46:28,920 --> 00:46:31,120
Speaker 1: you have the the argonauts of Greek myth, who were

798
00:46:31,120 --> 00:46:36,680
Speaker 1: simply sailors in the vessel argo um. But psychonaut. When

799
00:46:36,680 --> 00:46:38,480
Speaker 1: I was looking into it, I was thinking, Okay, this

800
00:46:38,560 --> 00:46:40,839
Speaker 1: term must have been around here in the sixties. Uh,

801
00:46:40,840 --> 00:46:44,480
Speaker 1: And it apparently wasn't. The term is widely used now,

802
00:46:44,520 --> 00:46:48,440
Speaker 1: but it didn't seem to emerge until German author Ernst

803
00:46:48,520 --> 00:46:51,960
Speaker 1: Hunger used it in nineteen in the nineteen seventy, and

804
00:46:52,000 --> 00:46:56,480
Speaker 1: it was subsequently picked up by various occultists and ethnobotanists,

805
00:46:56,560 --> 00:46:58,440
Speaker 1: and now it's become, you know, just sort of a

806
00:46:58,480 --> 00:47:01,960
Speaker 1: standard and really quite useful term for describing various twenty

807
00:47:02,239 --> 00:47:04,880
Speaker 1: or twenty first century individuals like say John C. Louis

808
00:47:05,000 --> 00:47:08,120
Speaker 1: or Terrence Mackinna, people who were explorers in the realm

809
00:47:08,160 --> 00:47:10,680
Speaker 1: of the mind. Yeah, yeah, but also yeah, but also

810
00:47:10,760 --> 00:47:13,680
Speaker 1: drawing in that sort of astronaut and motif of one

811
00:47:13,719 --> 00:47:16,120
Speaker 1: of one who goes out by going in and then

812
00:47:16,200 --> 00:47:19,080
Speaker 1: Joe I know you want to discuss, uh, the thagomizer.

813
00:47:19,239 --> 00:47:21,480
Speaker 1: Oh right, this comes from This is one of our favorites.

814
00:47:21,920 --> 00:47:23,799
Speaker 1: It's come up on stuff to blow your mind a lot.

815
00:47:24,360 --> 00:47:27,680
Speaker 1: So the thagomizer is something that was coined as a

816
00:47:27,800 --> 00:47:31,200
Speaker 1: joke in a Gary Larson cartoon. It refers to the

817
00:47:31,360 --> 00:47:35,360
Speaker 1: arrangement of spikes on the tail of a stegasaurus. Uh

818
00:47:35,360 --> 00:47:38,160
Speaker 1: and it's uh So there's a Gary Larson Far Side

819
00:47:38,200 --> 00:47:42,040
Speaker 1: cartoon where a caveman is apparently teaching a class and

820
00:47:42,160 --> 00:47:45,279
Speaker 1: is pointing to a picture like a slide projector I

821
00:47:45,320 --> 00:47:48,399
Speaker 1: G a slide of one of these things and says,

822
00:47:48,480 --> 00:47:51,359
Speaker 1: now this end is called the thagomizer, after the late

823
00:47:51,440 --> 00:47:55,520
Speaker 1: thag Simmons, which is wonderful. Yeah. So, so this was

824
00:47:55,719 --> 00:48:00,000
Speaker 1: eventually picked up by actual paleontologists who found this hilarious

825
00:48:00,400 --> 00:48:02,399
Speaker 1: because prior to this so you didn't have a name

826
00:48:02,440 --> 00:48:04,360
Speaker 1: for the spiked tail is just the spike tail of

827
00:48:04,360 --> 00:48:08,160
Speaker 1: a Stegasaurus or some other type of stegasaur. And when

828
00:48:08,200 --> 00:48:11,319
Speaker 1: you when you try to start breaking down how thagomizer

829
00:48:11,360 --> 00:48:14,760
Speaker 1: would even work as a word, it's crazy because okay,

830
00:48:14,760 --> 00:48:17,160
Speaker 1: we have fag. Fag is the name of the caveman,

831
00:48:17,400 --> 00:48:20,839
Speaker 1: victim of the dinosaur, your proper down there, right. And

832
00:48:21,000 --> 00:48:24,239
Speaker 1: but then we come to almiser O M I z r.

833
00:48:24,320 --> 00:48:27,080
Speaker 1: And this is just nonsense because yes, you do have

834
00:48:27,200 --> 00:48:31,240
Speaker 1: some English words that end with almiser, but their words

835
00:48:31,320 --> 00:48:37,680
Speaker 1: like randomizer, economizer, customizer, atomizer, and these all are root

836
00:48:37,719 --> 00:48:41,799
Speaker 1: words that themselves end in um, like atom and then

837
00:48:41,840 --> 00:48:44,960
Speaker 1: we get atomizer. So where does the arm come from

838
00:48:44,960 --> 00:48:49,080
Speaker 1: in thagom eiser? The eyser part of makes more sense

839
00:48:49,320 --> 00:48:51,560
Speaker 1: because I guess it's kind of like with tenderizer that

840
00:48:51,600 --> 00:48:54,239
Speaker 1: brings us to eyes. So if you allow us to

841
00:48:54,280 --> 00:48:59,600
Speaker 1: further u etomologize here, uh, it is just an old suffix,

842
00:49:00,080 --> 00:49:04,040
Speaker 1: like a long established suffix that that turns that allows

843
00:49:04,080 --> 00:49:06,760
Speaker 1: us to make a noun or adjective into a verb,

844
00:49:07,239 --> 00:49:10,120
Speaker 1: and then this can in turn be made into a noun.

845
00:49:10,840 --> 00:49:15,719
Speaker 1: So I just etymologized. I am the etymologizer, which is

846
00:49:15,719 --> 00:49:18,759
Speaker 1: not a real word but could be could extrapolate into it,

847
00:49:18,800 --> 00:49:22,800
Speaker 1: and you could follow the trails back to real words. Fagomizer,

848
00:49:22,960 --> 00:49:26,319
Speaker 1: if we are stretching, would at best mean a thing

849
00:49:26,480 --> 00:49:30,440
Speaker 1: that turns one into thag simmon, which makes no sense.

850
00:49:31,040 --> 00:49:33,920
Speaker 1: And yet at the same time, the joke still works.

851
00:49:33,960 --> 00:49:36,200
Speaker 1: Like me, clearly it worked. It was picked up, it

852
00:49:36,239 --> 00:49:39,280
Speaker 1: becomes an unofficial name for this part of the dinosaur.

853
00:49:39,360 --> 00:49:42,440
Speaker 1: I think official now is it official? Yeah, I mean

854
00:49:42,480 --> 00:49:45,920
Speaker 1: I think it's used in scientific publications. Well that sounds

855
00:49:45,920 --> 00:49:48,920
Speaker 1: good enough to me. So clearly it works when we

856
00:49:49,000 --> 00:49:52,600
Speaker 1: hear it, even though it doesn't when you dissect it linguistically.

857
00:49:52,680 --> 00:49:56,040
Speaker 1: It's just nonsense. But but we buy into it. I

858
00:49:56,040 --> 00:49:59,200
Speaker 1: guess you know, fag was perhaps atomized or tenderized by

859
00:49:59,200 --> 00:50:02,680
Speaker 1: the spiked tail, and you know that is weirdly a

860
00:50:02,800 --> 00:50:05,960
Speaker 1: relayed in the term thagomizer, even though it's just kind

861
00:50:06,000 --> 00:50:09,839
Speaker 1: of a distorted echo of actual language. Unfortunately, I think

862
00:50:09,840 --> 00:50:12,080
Speaker 1: we're gonna have to call it here for today. We're

863
00:50:12,160 --> 00:50:14,799
Speaker 1: running out of studio time, even though yeah, but yeah,

864
00:50:14,840 --> 00:50:17,719
Speaker 1: we um we will be back with part two of

865
00:50:17,760 --> 00:50:21,799
Speaker 1: our series Uninvented Words. Here. I'm having a lot of fun. Yeah, yeah,

866
00:50:21,880 --> 00:50:23,239
Speaker 1: this is this is a this is a fun one,

867
00:50:23,239 --> 00:50:25,120
Speaker 1: and I like where this journey is going because eventually

868
00:50:25,200 --> 00:50:27,719
Speaker 1: we can even get into the realm of invented language.

869
00:50:28,040 --> 00:50:29,640
Speaker 1: In the meantime, if you want to check out other

870
00:50:29,640 --> 00:50:34,000
Speaker 1: episodes of Invention, find us wherever you find podcast wherever

871
00:50:34,040 --> 00:50:36,319
Speaker 1: that happens to be. We're there, We're somewhere in there.

872
00:50:36,800 --> 00:50:38,600
Speaker 1: If you go to invention pot dot com that'll shoot

873
00:50:38,640 --> 00:50:40,120
Speaker 1: you over to the I Heart listing for the show,

874
00:50:40,320 --> 00:50:42,480
Speaker 1: but you will find us all over the place. Wherever

875
00:50:42,520 --> 00:50:44,919
Speaker 1: you get the show. Just make sure you subscribe, you rate,

876
00:50:45,160 --> 00:50:48,160
Speaker 1: and you review huge. Thanks as always to our excellent

877
00:50:48,200 --> 00:50:51,200
Speaker 1: audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson. If you would like to

878
00:50:51,200 --> 00:50:53,520
Speaker 1: get in touch with us with feedback on this episode

879
00:50:53,600 --> 00:50:55,720
Speaker 1: or any other, to suggest a topic for the future,

880
00:50:55,840 --> 00:50:59,000
Speaker 1: just to say hello, you can email us at contact

881
00:50:59,200 --> 00:51:05,360
Speaker 1: at invention in pop dot com. Invention is production of

882
00:51:05,360 --> 00:51:08,040
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio. For more podcasts for my heart Radio,

883
00:51:08,120 --> 00:51:10,719
Speaker 1: visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

884
00:51:10,760 --> 00:51:12,880
Speaker 1: listen to your favorite shows. H