In defense of etymological speculation

[Baker, John]

Fred,

        Both you and Gerald Cohen produced admirable statements in your initial posts, but I think you're overstating your position in this one.  Far-fetched speculation, yes, rarely has much to commend it, but informed speculation (which, one hopes, can be found, in most cases, from the members of the American Dialect Society) can give insights and serve to direct research.

        For example, the similarity between "bulldyke" and "bulldog" is so great that it would take strong evidence to convince me that there is no connection (though I'm skeptical of the "bulldog-like --> bulldyke" etymology that's been suggested).  And it seems to me entirely appropriate to consider the folk etymology (not mentioned on the list, unless I've missed it) that "dyke" derives from "dike" via the story about the finger in the dike.  If that were indeed the case, then "bulldyke" would be a logical formation from "bull (or bulldog) dyke."  The apparent primacy of "bulldyke" makes these theories unlikely, but I do not regard the matter as settled.

        For a different kind of example, the suggestion was made in another post that "bargaining chip" may derive from "chit."  That seems entirely plausible, and in fact "bargaining chit" is sometimes seen.  I took a look, and the "bargaining chit" cites seem to be both few in number and relatively recent, doubtless influenced by the same logic that led to consideration of "chit" in the first place.  I would argue that even this kind of negative information is of value.

        In any case, I fear that the public commitment to a good story will outweigh any influence we are likely to have.  And this is not, of course, a call for an abandonment of professional standards - I'm extremely hopeful that listmembers will not conflate reasonable speculation with discredited old chestnuts about the origin of "bug" or "hooker."

        BTW, Fred, thank you very much for your kind words in your other post.

John Baker


-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Shapiro [mailto:fred.shapiro at YALE.EDU]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 7:31 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: In defense of etymological speculation


In other words, far-fetched speculation, not just by the general public
but by professors who edit journals about etymology, pretty much robs
etymology of any value in terms of promulgating accurate word-histories.
How many people even realize that there is such a thing as accuracy in
word-histories and methods of verifying the truth (or, more often, the
falsity) of word-histories?

Fred Shapiro