linguistic chauvenisms

Dennis R. Preston preston at PILOT.MSU.EDU
Wed Feb 6 15:33:12 UTC 2002


larry,

I suspect you are correct with the "traditional" meaning of "folk
etymology" in particular, but, certainly among folklorists, this
would not fly. I still think the best (professional) treatment of
"folk" in such contexts is to refer to it as "nonspecialist belief
and explanation," although, of course, there are other areas of
folklore in which specialists certainly participate (as "legends" of
famous linguists would show).

As you might suspect, I have a little vested interest in this and may
be too strident or demanding.

dInIs

>At 8:32 AM -0500 2/6/02, Dennis R. Preston wrote:
>>Herb,
>>
>>You mean, of course, a case of folk linguistics which is not true.
>>"Folk" and "false" are not synonyms (at least not for professionals).
>>
>>dInIs
>
>Does that apply to folk etymology as well?  It certainly has a long
>history of being used so as to imply (if not entail) falseness.  If
>it turns out that someone discovers that "posh" really did originate
>from "port out starboard home", hard as that may be to imagine, would
>it still be a (correct) folk etymology?
>
>larry
>
>>
>>>some degree, r-less.  Is there any support for this
>>>claim, or is it another case of folk linguistics?
>>>
>>>Herb Stahlke



More information about the Ads-l mailing list