A torcherous eggcorn

[Arnold M. Zwicky]

On Dec 12, 2007, at 4:28 PM, John Baker wrote (about "phase" for
"faze"):
>

>        "Long-accepted" and "many dictionaries" may be overstatements
> (well, the latter is just an error from my mistaken memory), but my
> secondary point is that the "phase" spelling at all times has been
> accepted by at least some reputable writers.  I do not use it myself,
> but I do not consider it an error, unless there is an applicable
> stylebook.

the matter is pretty clearly in a gray area between standard and non-
standard (we've seen other such cases).  you're entitled to use
"phase" for 'daunt', but you should realize that many people will
treat that as a straightforward error.

"unless there is an applicable stylebook": i don't understand this.  i
have cited a number of stylebooks that label "phase" 'daunt' an error,
and with some work i could probably list a hundred or so.  this
against Bernstein and WNI3.  even the generous MWDEU says: "in the
interests of lessening confusion in the world, we recommend that you
use _faze_ to mean "daunt" and let _phase_ have its own distinctive
use." (while admitting that "phase" will continue to be used).

arnold

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