WEBVTT - Short Stuff: The Science of Funny Words

0:00:04.880 --> 0:00:07.080
<v Speaker 1>Hey, and welcome to the short Stuff. I'm Josh, and

0:00:07.120 --> 0:00:11.039
<v Speaker 1>there's Chuck and we have one word for you, buddy wiggle.

0:00:13.840 --> 0:00:21.200
<v Speaker 1>Here's another one, Chuck. Poop. That's a genuine laugh. Always

0:00:21.200 --> 0:00:23.720
<v Speaker 1>gets me. Poop is just funny. It is funny. It's

0:00:23.920 --> 0:00:27.560
<v Speaker 1>literally a funny word. Um. And this episode we're talking

0:00:27.920 --> 0:00:32.120
<v Speaker 1>about a guy named Chris Westbury who is a researcher

0:00:32.200 --> 0:00:36.040
<v Speaker 1>out of the University of Alberta, a psychologist actually, and

0:00:36.080 --> 0:00:38.360
<v Speaker 1>he wanted to figure out what makes things funny and

0:00:38.400 --> 0:00:42.040
<v Speaker 1>specifically what makes some words funnier than others. And apparently

0:00:42.400 --> 0:00:45.560
<v Speaker 1>he was a bit of a math genius as a child,

0:00:45.720 --> 0:00:49.000
<v Speaker 1>really got into the statistical analysis kind of stuff, and

0:00:49.040 --> 0:00:52.879
<v Speaker 1>he's applied that as an adult in a study that

0:00:52.960 --> 0:00:55.600
<v Speaker 1>has one of the better names of any study ever published.

0:00:56.240 --> 0:00:58.720
<v Speaker 1>Are you setting me up? I am, Yeah. It was

0:00:58.760 --> 0:01:04.280
<v Speaker 1>called Wrigglely Squiffy lummocks and boobs colon what makes some

0:01:04.400 --> 0:01:08.240
<v Speaker 1>words funny? And this is just super interesting to me too, because,

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:12.039
<v Speaker 1>like we were talking about, with the nounds of assemblage,

0:01:12.480 --> 0:01:15.520
<v Speaker 1>words and etymology really interests me, and comedy interests me.

0:01:15.600 --> 0:01:18.360
<v Speaker 1>And even though I've never done stand up, I know

0:01:18.440 --> 0:01:21.800
<v Speaker 1>that comedians take a lot of great care with not

0:01:21.840 --> 0:01:23.960
<v Speaker 1>only the bits and the flow and the tone, but

0:01:24.319 --> 0:01:28.199
<v Speaker 1>specific words are funnier than others and can really punch

0:01:28.280 --> 0:01:32.080
<v Speaker 1>up a joke. Agreed, And it says here in this house,

0:01:32.080 --> 0:01:36.520
<v Speaker 1>stuff works article a word like Schenectady or Rancho, cucamonga

0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:41.120
<v Speaker 1>or kalamazoo or just kind of funny words. And this

0:01:41.200 --> 0:01:45.360
<v Speaker 1>guy went out to figure out why. Yeah, he said why.

0:01:45.640 --> 0:01:47.920
<v Speaker 1>People said, who cares, it's it's just funny. Don't look

0:01:47.960 --> 0:01:50.400
<v Speaker 1>too deeply into it. And he said, no, I'm gonna

0:01:50.400 --> 0:01:52.880
<v Speaker 1>do the opposite of that. You will sit there and

0:01:52.960 --> 0:01:55.560
<v Speaker 1>listen when I explain it to you through Josh and Chuck.

0:01:55.920 --> 0:01:58.840
<v Speaker 1>That's right. So what he did was he started off

0:01:58.960 --> 0:02:00.920
<v Speaker 1>with and this is gonna get it really kind of

0:02:01.200 --> 0:02:05.120
<v Speaker 1>not fun at all in a minute. But he started

0:02:05.120 --> 0:02:08.160
<v Speaker 1>off with a list of five thousand English words that

0:02:08.600 --> 0:02:10.880
<v Speaker 1>were rated funniest by people. I guess he did a

0:02:10.919 --> 0:02:15.200
<v Speaker 1>poll or something. And then he constructed a mathematical model

0:02:15.919 --> 0:02:19.959
<v Speaker 1>for predicting which one's uh what what would be funny

0:02:20.040 --> 0:02:23.160
<v Speaker 1>for every single word, like a ranking I guess for

0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:26.120
<v Speaker 1>every single word in the dictionary. Yeah, this model he

0:02:26.200 --> 0:02:28.680
<v Speaker 1>came up with it's kind of complex, it's multi layered.

0:02:28.760 --> 0:02:31.919
<v Speaker 1>It's kind of like an onion, and he basically now

0:02:31.960 --> 0:02:35.000
<v Speaker 1>came run any any word through it. It's okay, he

0:02:35.080 --> 0:02:39.400
<v Speaker 1>can run the The onion is hilarious, but um, he

0:02:39.440 --> 0:02:42.919
<v Speaker 1>can run any word through it and basically spit out like, ah,

0:02:43.600 --> 0:02:48.239
<v Speaker 1>I guess a ranking, how funny? I guess yeah, how

0:02:48.280 --> 0:02:51.840
<v Speaker 1>funny that that word will probably be received? Right, And

0:02:51.880 --> 0:02:55.200
<v Speaker 1>this is all English words specifically, But he came up with,

0:02:55.280 --> 0:03:00.400
<v Speaker 1>based on this mathematical model, the ten funniest words, one

0:03:00.440 --> 0:03:05.040
<v Speaker 1>of which we probably shouldn't even say. Yeah, I guess so,

0:03:05.120 --> 0:03:14.799
<v Speaker 1>but hey man, first amendment, All right up, chuck, yeah, funny, bubby, bof,

0:03:16.120 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 1>wriggly yaps, giggle, chuck, no, no, no, no, no, cooch, guffaw, puffball,

0:03:28.880 --> 0:03:31.760
<v Speaker 1>and jiggly. Right, so those are the tin funniest. The

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:35.880
<v Speaker 1>runners up were squiffy, flappy and bucko and buck is

0:03:35.920 --> 0:03:41.800
<v Speaker 1>a great one, poop, puke and boobs got you just now,

0:03:42.080 --> 0:03:47.680
<v Speaker 1>it just got you just. I mean, it's funny. Poop

0:03:47.800 --> 0:03:51.600
<v Speaker 1>is funny the same reason farting is funny. Yeah, the

0:03:51.600 --> 0:03:54.360
<v Speaker 1>word fart is funny. Far the word fart is funny,

0:03:54.440 --> 0:03:57.600
<v Speaker 1>but it's also like shame inducing, you know, like it

0:03:57.640 --> 0:03:59.920
<v Speaker 1>really makes you feel really bad about yourself when you

0:04:00.160 --> 0:04:03.080
<v Speaker 1>use it, right, Yeah, I mean it might just be me,

0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:07.360
<v Speaker 1>but poop basically, no one feels bad for saying the

0:04:07.400 --> 0:04:10.920
<v Speaker 1>word poop, and it is just a genuinely funny word. Yeah.

0:04:11.000 --> 0:04:13.640
<v Speaker 1>And I'll also mention that farting is the one thing

0:04:13.720 --> 0:04:16.800
<v Speaker 1>that allows me to hold on to the fact that

0:04:16.839 --> 0:04:20.240
<v Speaker 1>there may be a God, that there are far yeah,

0:04:20.240 --> 0:04:22.279
<v Speaker 1>and that that God has a sense of humor because

0:04:22.440 --> 0:04:27.599
<v Speaker 1>the fact that a smelly, flammable gas comes out of

0:04:27.640 --> 0:04:32.839
<v Speaker 1>your butt hole and makes a sound. Yeah, And believe us, everybody,

0:04:32.839 --> 0:04:35.920
<v Speaker 1>we've verified it is flammable. It's one of the greatest

0:04:35.920 --> 0:04:40.640
<v Speaker 1>things about human beings. It's pretty great, you know. Especially

0:04:40.720 --> 0:04:45.320
<v Speaker 1>it's like food goes in. We say poot in our house. Now,

0:04:45.680 --> 0:04:48.080
<v Speaker 1>poot's a good one for obvious reasons, you know what

0:04:48.200 --> 0:04:50.960
<v Speaker 1>I say, of course, or just shoot a duck that's right,

0:04:51.920 --> 0:04:54.960
<v Speaker 1>or just pretend it didn't happen. One of those two. Right.

0:04:55.240 --> 0:04:59.320
<v Speaker 1>So another thing we should mention here is um the

0:04:59.360 --> 0:05:02.800
<v Speaker 1>increm congruity theory, and that is the idea that and

0:05:02.839 --> 0:05:05.960
<v Speaker 1>this is sort of a tried and true comedy virtue

0:05:06.000 --> 0:05:10.720
<v Speaker 1>which is something unexpected will make you laugh. Most times.

0:05:10.760 --> 0:05:13.400
<v Speaker 1>It's when you have an expectation of something and something

0:05:13.400 --> 0:05:16.400
<v Speaker 1>else happens. A lot of good comedy can come from that.

0:05:17.040 --> 0:05:19.640
<v Speaker 1>And I mean that's absolutely the basis of comedy, at

0:05:19.680 --> 0:05:24.839
<v Speaker 1>least as far as like all anecdotal evidence, all um,

0:05:25.000 --> 0:05:30.120
<v Speaker 1>like sensible common sense, which is the most sensible kind

0:05:30.960 --> 0:05:33.919
<v Speaker 1>or the most common kind? Um When you when you

0:05:34.000 --> 0:05:36.200
<v Speaker 1>like you really stop and think about in congruity theory,

0:05:36.320 --> 0:05:38.760
<v Speaker 1>it really really makes a lot of sense, right. But

0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:42.080
<v Speaker 1>Chris Westbury was like, that's all well, and good way

0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:44.800
<v Speaker 1>to go Cicero for coming up with in congruity theory.

0:05:44.839 --> 0:05:47.000
<v Speaker 1>But I like to quantify things, so I'm going to

0:05:47.080 --> 0:05:49.520
<v Speaker 1>do that and we'll be right back to explain exactly

0:05:49.560 --> 0:06:10.120
<v Speaker 1>how we did that. After this, I got a question,

0:06:11.200 --> 0:06:14.080
<v Speaker 1>is Westbury the most interesting guy at the dinner party?

0:06:14.160 --> 0:06:16.120
<v Speaker 1>Or does he make you want to gouge your eyeballs out?

0:06:17.120 --> 0:06:19.359
<v Speaker 1>I he might be listening, so I'm not going to

0:06:19.400 --> 0:06:22.320
<v Speaker 1>answer that question. He's one or the other, right, there's

0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:24.160
<v Speaker 1>no in between. You're either like, oh my god, I

0:06:24.240 --> 0:06:26.280
<v Speaker 1>meant this guy and you wouldn't believe like he's got

0:06:26.320 --> 0:06:29.919
<v Speaker 1>these theories and mathematical things we're following, like we're selling

0:06:29.960 --> 0:06:31.919
<v Speaker 1>off all of our stuff and we're gonna start following

0:06:31.960 --> 0:06:34.520
<v Speaker 1>them around. Or he's like, oh God, give me away

0:06:34.520 --> 0:06:36.279
<v Speaker 1>from this, dude. I just tried to make a fart joke,

0:06:36.360 --> 0:06:38.680
<v Speaker 1>and he tried to explain it to me. Right, let

0:06:38.680 --> 0:06:40.799
<v Speaker 1>me go find somebody who's been on the keyto diet

0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:44.160
<v Speaker 1>for three years and talked to them instead. Oh man,

0:06:45.120 --> 0:06:50.000
<v Speaker 1>that's good. So um, what it is? You know why

0:06:50.040 --> 0:06:51.520
<v Speaker 1>because the letter K is in there and we'll get

0:06:51.560 --> 0:06:54.000
<v Speaker 1>to that in a minute. Totally. But what Chris Westbury

0:06:54.040 --> 0:06:56.200
<v Speaker 1>did was he basically took all these words. I think

0:06:56.200 --> 0:06:58.720
<v Speaker 1>he took um several hundred of him to start, like

0:06:58.760 --> 0:07:02.560
<v Speaker 1>a subset of the was five thousand funniest words, and

0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:04.760
<v Speaker 1>he just kind of took a random subset of him

0:07:04.920 --> 0:07:09.000
<v Speaker 1>and he started analyzing them with a Google tool that

0:07:09.120 --> 0:07:12.600
<v Speaker 1>basically shows co occurrence. Right, So basically you run these

0:07:12.640 --> 0:07:16.760
<v Speaker 1>words through this little Google machine learning algorithm and it

0:07:16.880 --> 0:07:20.440
<v Speaker 1>spits out other words that people have used instead of

0:07:20.600 --> 0:07:23.360
<v Speaker 1>or in conjunction with it, right. And what he figured

0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:27.840
<v Speaker 1>out was that out of like this couple hundred sample set,

0:07:29.400 --> 0:07:33.640
<v Speaker 1>you could basically boil it down to six general categories um,

0:07:33.920 --> 0:07:35.880
<v Speaker 1>and all of the words had something to do with

0:07:35.920 --> 0:07:42.480
<v Speaker 1>either an expletive, being an expletive, um, sex, the body, partying.

0:07:42.760 --> 0:07:44.920
<v Speaker 1>I guess which one just just kind of struck me

0:07:44.960 --> 0:07:47.600
<v Speaker 1>as out of the blue, Um, I was not expecting

0:07:47.640 --> 0:07:53.120
<v Speaker 1>that one. What else, chuck, animals or insults? And so

0:07:53.160 --> 0:07:57.760
<v Speaker 1>those are the six clusters of categories of funny words. Okay,

0:07:57.760 --> 0:08:00.240
<v Speaker 1>so he said, all right, great, but the thing is,

0:08:00.560 --> 0:08:03.320
<v Speaker 1>there's a lot of words that like kind of straddle

0:08:03.400 --> 0:08:06.880
<v Speaker 1>these categories. How can you how can you say, like,

0:08:07.200 --> 0:08:09.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, what makes one funnier than the other? What's

0:08:09.560 --> 0:08:12.240
<v Speaker 1>the deal here? And I'm not sure how he did this.

0:08:12.400 --> 0:08:14.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm not even sure that he knows how he did this.

0:08:15.480 --> 0:08:23.200
<v Speaker 1>But he basically assigned a statistical UM number two a

0:08:23.360 --> 0:08:28.120
<v Speaker 1>word and insofar as it related to its category. Right,

0:08:28.200 --> 0:08:34.120
<v Speaker 1>so like um uh, birthday cake were probably pretty close

0:08:34.280 --> 0:08:38.400
<v Speaker 1>to the party category, like it's it's probably pretty close

0:08:38.480 --> 0:08:42.080
<v Speaker 1>or fete or fiesta or something like that. It's very

0:08:42.080 --> 0:08:44.960
<v Speaker 1>close to its synonymous to a ward in this category.

0:08:45.000 --> 0:08:47.200
<v Speaker 1>But even that didn't quite describe what made a word

0:08:47.200 --> 0:08:49.000
<v Speaker 1>funny and what a guess he figured out And I'm

0:08:49.000 --> 0:08:51.839
<v Speaker 1>not sure how he did this was that the funniest

0:08:51.880 --> 0:08:57.480
<v Speaker 1>words were related, um equally roughly to a number of

0:08:57.520 --> 0:09:00.240
<v Speaker 1>different categories. And it seems like the more that a

0:09:00.280 --> 0:09:03.079
<v Speaker 1>word was related to one or a number of these

0:09:03.080 --> 0:09:06.640
<v Speaker 1>six categories, the funnier it was. And a good example

0:09:06.679 --> 0:09:10.480
<v Speaker 1>he gave was poop right, it's uh it. It can

0:09:10.520 --> 0:09:13.880
<v Speaker 1>be an expletive, it can be um, part of the body,

0:09:14.320 --> 0:09:18.080
<v Speaker 1>it can be a party. Um. There's it has to

0:09:18.120 --> 0:09:21.280
<v Speaker 1>do with multiple categories, and so it's funnier than say,

0:09:21.360 --> 0:09:24.320
<v Speaker 1>fiesta is you know that made sense to me for

0:09:24.360 --> 0:09:29.960
<v Speaker 1>the first time after reading this like seven times, yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, seven, seven, eight,

0:09:30.080 --> 0:09:32.719
<v Speaker 1>ten times maybe yeah. It just the way he was

0:09:32.760 --> 0:09:35.040
<v Speaker 1>putting it never made sense, but you brought it around

0:09:35.080 --> 0:09:37.080
<v Speaker 1>for me. So thank you, thank you, Chuck Man. That

0:09:37.120 --> 0:09:40.280
<v Speaker 1>means a lot to me. So he got to that point,

0:09:40.360 --> 0:09:41.840
<v Speaker 1>but then he said, you know what the meaning of

0:09:41.840 --> 0:09:44.440
<v Speaker 1>these words, that's only one kind of measurement. Everyone else

0:09:44.480 --> 0:09:48.880
<v Speaker 1>was saying, stop, that's good, that's good, you're fine, you

0:09:48.920 --> 0:09:51.439
<v Speaker 1>did it, you did it. But he said, no, no, no,

0:09:51.520 --> 0:09:54.200
<v Speaker 1>that's not enough. Meeting is only one type of measurement.

0:09:54.320 --> 0:09:56.160
<v Speaker 1>And so he said, let's look at and this is

0:09:56.160 --> 0:09:58.240
<v Speaker 1>actually kind of the good part to me, He said,

0:09:58.280 --> 0:10:00.000
<v Speaker 1>we need to look at the form of these words,

0:10:00.720 --> 0:10:03.320
<v Speaker 1>how long they are, the individual sounds that make up

0:10:03.360 --> 0:10:07.520
<v Speaker 1>these words, And that's where incongruity theory of humor kind

0:10:07.520 --> 0:10:11.840
<v Speaker 1>of comes back, because the fewer times that these uh

0:10:11.960 --> 0:10:15.160
<v Speaker 1>phone ms uh, the individual sounds appear like, the more

0:10:15.240 --> 0:10:21.560
<v Speaker 1>rare they are, the funnier that people think they are. Yeah, Like, basically, um,

0:10:21.600 --> 0:10:25.760
<v Speaker 1>I guess K is much The K sound in particular

0:10:26.160 --> 0:10:31.280
<v Speaker 1>is much less um used in English than say, like B.

0:10:33.200 --> 0:10:36.480
<v Speaker 1>So that's why like words with K sounds or are

0:10:36.559 --> 0:10:39.320
<v Speaker 1>funnier than words with say, T sounds. So pickle is

0:10:39.360 --> 0:10:43.440
<v Speaker 1>funnier than tomato, which is we just inherently know. And

0:10:43.480 --> 0:10:46.280
<v Speaker 1>so what Chris Westberry was basically onto is that by

0:10:46.360 --> 0:10:50.360
<v Speaker 1>analyzing the arrangement of letters and how frequently they occur

0:10:50.800 --> 0:10:55.040
<v Speaker 1>in words in the English language, that he tied it

0:10:55.080 --> 0:10:59.000
<v Speaker 1>into that incongruity theory. And he basically said, our brains

0:10:59.040 --> 0:11:03.079
<v Speaker 1>are constantly analyzing the information that's coming in from watching

0:11:03.080 --> 0:11:06.000
<v Speaker 1>TV or talking to people or reading or something like that,

0:11:06.280 --> 0:11:10.040
<v Speaker 1>and we have a certain expectation. And with that expectation,

0:11:10.200 --> 0:11:14.720
<v Speaker 1>isn't met um like something that statistically is improbable like

0:11:15.160 --> 0:11:18.440
<v Speaker 1>the word walla, walla Washington comes up out of nowhere.

0:11:18.800 --> 0:11:21.240
<v Speaker 1>You don't see that every day. You weren't really expecting it,

0:11:21.280 --> 0:11:23.600
<v Speaker 1>and it kind of makes things funny to you because

0:11:23.600 --> 0:11:27.600
<v Speaker 1>it triggers that incongruity response. Yeah, and that your brain

0:11:27.720 --> 0:11:29.920
<v Speaker 1>is you don't know it, but it's constantly doing this

0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:33.319
<v Speaker 1>in the background, and you just here it is funny, right,

0:11:33.760 --> 0:11:37.440
<v Speaker 1>you just you just go walla, walla Washington. So yeah,

0:11:37.480 --> 0:11:41.160
<v Speaker 1>if you're just starting out in comedy, really pay attention

0:11:41.200 --> 0:11:43.520
<v Speaker 1>to the words, and especially the words in the punch

0:11:43.559 --> 0:11:48.800
<v Speaker 1>line because swapping out individual words can make a big difference. Um.

0:11:48.920 --> 0:11:51.800
<v Speaker 1>Can we close with this quote from The Sunshine Boys? Yeah,

0:11:51.840 --> 0:11:54.200
<v Speaker 1>I think so the great. Have you ever seen this movie?

0:11:54.760 --> 0:11:57.200
<v Speaker 1>I have not, man, but I know it's George Burns

0:11:57.200 --> 0:11:59.680
<v Speaker 1>and Walter math Yes, it is the best. It is

0:11:59.720 --> 0:12:02.839
<v Speaker 1>a great movie about this comedy team who hate each

0:12:02.840 --> 0:12:05.800
<v Speaker 1>other's guts and they're old men now and they're trying

0:12:05.840 --> 0:12:09.480
<v Speaker 1>to get them together for a reunion show. So Walter

0:12:09.600 --> 0:12:13.440
<v Speaker 1>math Aw says this, fifty seven years in the business,

0:12:13.440 --> 0:12:15.679
<v Speaker 1>you learn a few things. You know what words are

0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:19.360
<v Speaker 1>funny and which words are not funny. Alka Seltza is funny.

0:12:19.920 --> 0:12:23.640
<v Speaker 1>You say alka seltza, you get a laugh Casey stingle.

0:12:24.000 --> 0:12:28.000
<v Speaker 1>That's a funny name. Robert Taylor is not funny, Cupcake

0:12:28.120 --> 0:12:32.720
<v Speaker 1>is funny, Tomato is not funny. Cleveland is funny, Maryland

0:12:32.840 --> 0:12:36.240
<v Speaker 1>is not funny. And then there's chicken. Chicken is funny,

0:12:36.440 --> 0:12:41.040
<v Speaker 1>Pickle is funny. And he's kind of right. Oh, he's

0:12:41.080 --> 0:12:44.400
<v Speaker 1>beyond kind of right. He's fully right, for sure. Good stuff.

0:12:44.679 --> 0:12:48.319
<v Speaker 1>But just one question. That was your Walter math Now

0:12:48.640 --> 0:12:53.320
<v Speaker 1>that wasn't great. Well, everybody go watch the Sunshine Boys

0:12:53.559 --> 0:12:55.560
<v Speaker 1>and see what Chuck was talking about, and you can

0:12:55.600 --> 0:12:57.960
<v Speaker 1>compare his Walter math out to the real Walter math. Ow,

0:12:58.040 --> 0:13:00.320
<v Speaker 1>how about that? And in the meantime, you can go

0:13:00.400 --> 0:13:02.400
<v Speaker 1>check out this article on how stuff works. Right, Chuck,

0:13:02.480 --> 0:13:05.440
<v Speaker 1>that's right. And in the meantime, meantime, short stuff is out.

0:13:08.400 --> 0:13:10.240
<v Speaker 1>Stuff you Should Know is a production of I Heart

0:13:10.280 --> 0:13:13.400
<v Speaker 1>Radio's How Stuff Works. For more podcasts for my heart Radio,

0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:16.360
<v Speaker 1>visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

0:13:16.400 --> 0:13:20.599
<v Speaker 1>listen to your favorite shows. H