Date:    Wed, 11 Mar 1998 11:34:36 -0600
<br>From:    William J Stone  W-Stone[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]NEIU.EDU 
<br>Subject: Re: standardization of non-standard forms
<br>
<br>On Wed, 11 Mar 1998, Larry Horn wrote: 
<br>  These are all nice malapropisms, granted, although I'd also call them nonce
<br>  reanalyses and/or folk etymologies, since they all involve an invention of
<br>  transparency at some level.  Many of them are widely attested (the
<br>  "doggy-dog world", "passify" (which could be a blend of pacify and
<br>  passivize), perhaps "taking for granite" (and don't forget "it takes two to
<br>  tangle"), but I'd still be wary of seeing any standardization in these
<br>  cases.  That is, I don't think there's really a dialect group in which
<br>  these versions are learned as such (as opposed to being reinvented as nonce
<br>  forms within a given idiolect).  Some we've discussed earlier under the
<br>  heading of mondegreens or pullet surprises are more plausible candidates
<br>  for this standardization: "duck tape", "chaise lounge", perhaps "tenure
<br>  tract" or "no holes barred".
<br>          I was just reminded of another expression that has now shifted
<br>  along the lines of the (non-malapropism?) examples I was citing yesterday
<br>  (proof in the pudding, wherefore art thou): the reanalysis of "beg the
<br>  question".  ESPN's baseball analyst Peter Gammons last night was discussing
<br>  the Toronto Blue Jays' prospects for this year, with strong pitching and
<br>  uncertain hitting, and said that this "begs the question of which is more
<br>  important, pitching or hitting"--i.e., it RAISES that question.  OK, not a
<br>  malapropism, but this clearly represents a standardization of a form not
<br>  standardly used with this meaning.
<br> 
<br> 
<br>  Larry
<br> 
<br>Larry Horn distinguishes the standardized malapropism from the nonce form.
<br>This brought to mind a difference in nursery rhymes between Britain and
<br>the U.S.  I was raised in Britain with "A ring, a ring of roses, a pocket
<br>full of posies" with its reference to the signs of the plague.(Who but the
<br>British would make a nursey rhyme out of a fatal disease?) A few years ago
<br>I found my American wife teaching our first child "A ring around the
<br>rosie".  I assumed that she had merely misheard the rhyme and was giving a
<br>nonce malapropism. Having lived here for a few years now, I find that this
<br>is the way that the rhyme goes here.  While not in the same category as
<br>other malapropisms, it does appear related to me.  Incidentally, what does
<br>"A ring around the rosie" mean?
<br>
<br>W.J.Stone
<br>Linguistics Department
<br>N.E.Illinois University
<br>