November 22, 2006
Nuclear Vernacular
I just noticed that nucular is in the vernacular, since Webster's accepts now it as a secondary pronunciation. Does that mean that there should be a vernaclear with nuclear in it?
vernaclear [v&(r)-'na-klE-&r]: (adj) the way a word that is commonly mispronounced or misspelled should be pronounced or spelled, especially if the mistaken form has muscled its way into becoming an accepted form.
And if we use this new word enough, it will find its way into the lexicon as well. But would that be paradoxical, or self-fulfilling?
Posted by Billy at November 22, 2006 01:09 AM
Horrors! I was so hoping that wouldn't happen. That's one of those things that feels like fingernails on a chalkboard! Whatever are we to do? (I'm only half kidding)
Thank you for commenting, Amy! This masterpiece has been languishing on my blog, edging ever nearer to the 60-day expiration precipice, with nobody acknowledging its profundity. Well, you didn't say much about profundity. But thank you for supporting the conversation.
Honestly, I'm a little bit horrified too.
Hi, Bill!
Neither paradox nor self-fulfillment, I should think, but language evolution. The result of the continual push-pull between the way something "ought" to be said and the way a speech community (to use a geeky term) collectively decides it should be said.
Like --okay, take "ought." Once upon a time, the "gh" was pronounced -- sort like the "ch" in "Loch Ness" as pronounced by a Klingon. Are we better off, then, that Bill doesn't have to say, "This is my dauCHter, Georgia"? Dunno.
On the other hand, my mental teeth do stand on edge when I hear someone say, "kyoo-pon" instead of "coo-pon" when referring to a coupon.
-- Meanwhile, love the Orange Crayon multi-site! And, if this makes you feel better, I've just transformed into a left-handed mouser as well.
