fi, en, (sv, ja, hu, yi) | avatar by https://twitter.com/udonkimuchikaki


libera.chat, irc.sortix.org
nortti
microblog (that is, a blog with small entries)
microblog.ahti.space/nortti

kojote
@kojote

Gooooood morning fuzzies! Happy Ides of March, if that’s a thing one wishes people? I do not understand how we made it halfway through the month so quickly, but apparently we did :P and I am going to use my lunch break to talk about Words some more :3 Nothing to do with AI, for once.

In my last post, about the etymology of “blow job,” I mentioned what I referred to as the Dog Etymology Cutesiness Razor, which is not a thing. That’s distinct from the Dog Cuteness Razor, which is just that all dogs should be assumed cute, see attached photo for a dog from this morning’s walk.

But let me try to put something down in writing, if you are given an etymology and want to know if it’s accurate or not. One thing you could do is waste an entire day in the OED and reading old books and newspapers, if you have an OED subscription and a perverse willingness to sci-hub your way into any academic papers that catch your eye. This is generally not necessary. The Razor is:

Cute etymologies are never correct.

By “cute” I don’t mean the way that dogs are. But here are six things to look out for.


crimsonruari
@crimsonruari

"Surprising" only in the sense that no it's not surprising like that, but maybe it's a bit surprising that sensation has created an entire genre of bullshit folk etymologies, rather like there seems to be a compulsion to fill in every gap in every media franchise that ever was.

(Ok I can't get too salty about that 'modern' trend because hooo boy Apocrypha...)


kojote
@kojote

This is a good point. I guess something I didn’t comment on, but bears noting, is that etymologies are often unclear. I don’t know where “geek” comes from, I just know one specific place it doesn’t come from. I hinted at this a bit, but perhaps not with desirable clarity. Urban legends often seek to fill in gaps in understanding—to create explanations from ambiguity and uncertainty. Part of dealing with them is accepting that this ambiguity is just part of history and the search for knowledge in general.

Etymologists don’t know where “dog” comes from. If you read that it comes from a lost hypocorism that was never recorded because it was seen as childish or informal? Possibly! A specific breed of dog that was then transferred by extension to all dogs? Why not? The name of a Celtic tribe who wore wolfskins into battle? Well, probably not, but it’s a big world right? A contraction of the French d’Octobre, “of/from October,” because that’s when hunting season began for retrievers? Be skeptical!

…these latter two are not actual theories, btw.

If someone tells you that the first dogs were brought to England in the 16th century in crates stamped “Dutch Oriental Goods”? Sit them down for a chat and become That Person in their life :3 But also, do so with the knowledge that we do not, and possibly never will, know why dogs are actually called that.

(which is why it’s best to just call them good boys and girls and have done with it)


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @kojote's post: