Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Paul's avatar

This comment isn't specifically about the current edition. On some other page, which I can’t find again at the moment, you speak of our tendency as native speakers of English to go all hypercorrect when explaining pronunciation to speakers of other languages. The example given was clothes /klouðz/ vs /klouz/. So anyway I thought you might be amused by this illustrative verse from the very obscure “Songs of the Pogo“, 1956. In the song _Whither the Starling and Whither the Crow_, Walt Kelly wrote the following: “the weaver‘s wet daughter has dampened the clothes / with wavelets of water left over from snowthes“.

Expand full comment
Mike's avatar

>bought a cat in the bag (een kat in de zak kopen)

We do have "bought a pig in a poke", but I suspect that a lot of people don't know that "poke" here is an archaic word for a bag (related: "pocket"). In any event, "pig in a poke" might not be that common anymore, dunno.

re: porcupine. I like our tendency to name unfamiliar animals with more familiar names. As you note, "pig" is one of those kinds of ur-animals, at least for naming purposes. In German (and Old English), as you know, a porpoise is a Meerschwein. Plus we have aardvark (Dutch), hyena (Greek "hys" for "pig"), guinea pig, hedgehog, and and groundhog. If a new animal is big, it's a type of horse; if it's small, it's a kind of pig. :)

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts