Slow and not too bright

[James A. Landau]

In a message dated 5/14/2003 12:33:35 PM Eastern Standard Time,
JJJRLandau at AOL.COM writes:

> It seems obvious to me that a word or phrase can [sic---should be cannot]
> get accepted into a language/slang/argot/jargon unless the potential users
> are 1) familiar with the referent and 2) have some reason to associate the
> new word or phrase with the referent.

I just found a good example to illustrate points 1) and 2) above.

"[Tommy] Chong also pleaded guilty Tuesday on behalf of his business, Nice
Dreams Enterprises, which made a line of marijuana bongs and pipes. Doing
business as Chong Glass, Nice Dreams Enterprises sold glass pipes and bongs
that Chong acknowledged were used to smoke marijuana."

I would have no trouble associating the word "bong" with its referent, except
that I have no idea what the referent is.  From context it obviously is
something used for smoking marijuana.  Mr. Chong's bongs may or may not be
made of glass.  Nor is it clear whether a bong is attached to a pipe, is a
substitute for a pipe, or is even necessary if one already has a pipe.
Apparently the two are of equal importance or value, as the first sentence
says "bongs and pipes" and the second "pipes and bongs".

         - James A. Landau