A torcherous eggcorn

[Chris F Waigl]

Baker, John wrote:
>         True, I did mention this on ECDB, although I was unaware that
> anyone had noted my remark.  My primary point was that "phase" appears
> to be a spelling variation of "faze," and not a re-analysis, so I don't
> understand why it would be considered an eggcorn.  In this regard, I
> find your discussion of "die is cast" helpful.
>
>
I'm a bit unsure what you mean by "spelling variation and not
re-analysis" -- the "faze" and "phase" point in pretty much opposite
directions as far as word origin is concerned that if phase can be
considered a variant now, it must have been a misspelling (and not just
mere variation) first.

As for re-analysis, I have encountered at least two very sensible
explanations or rationalisations of the "phase" spelling:

a) (many times) As a back-formation from the sci-fi (Star Treck?) weapon
called a phaser. "X doesn't phase me" is then explained as "doesn't
threaten me, won't knock me off my feet" etc.
b) (more rarely, but I am biased as this was a potential analysis I
contemplated until I had looked it up, about 10 years ago -- being a
non-native speaker means that I actually have to look up this sort of
thing once in a while) From the phase of a wave, i.e. the relative
location of minima and maxima relative to other waves. Ok this sounds
technical, but the idea is falling out of step, being dislocated from
the order of the environment.

Cheers

Chris Waigl

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org