[Ads-l] bobble/bauble

[Wilson Gray]

> The “baubles" have now been changed to "bobbles" by an unmerged editor.

[hw]ew! Close one!

But seriously, folks, isn’t _whew_ voiceless for everyone? Exclamations
tend to break the rules in all languages. Of course, _whew_ doesn’t break
any rules for me, but y'all gnome sane.

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:22 PM Ben Zimmer <bgzimmer at gmail.com> wrote:

> Now on Language Log (quoting Larry's observations).
>
> http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=34806
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 3, 2017, at 10:03 AM, Ben Zimmer <bgzimmer at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >>> On Oct 3, 2017, at 1:17 AM, Ben Zimmer <bgzimmer at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I suppose the "cot"/"caught" merger is to blame for the appearance of
> > >>> "bauble" here (three times!)...
> > >>>
> > >>> ---
> > >>> https://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/the-error-
> > >> in-baseball-and-the-moral-dimension-to-american-life
> > >>> In practice, “ordinary effort” describes, as Bill James wrote, what
> > >> should
> > >>> have happened. What should have happened in a piece of fielding can
> > have
> > >>> nothing to do with the play of the fielder. Utter offered me a case:
> > The
> > >>> runner hits the ball into the outfield, the fielder baubles the ball,
> > and
> > >>> the runner advances to second. Is that an error? It depends. “What we
> > >> would
> > >>> have to look at is—is it a single or is it a double? Or is it a
> single
> > >> and
> > >>> advance on an error or on the throw?” The way that the scorer
> > determines
> > >>> whether that bauble is an error or not has less to do with the action
> > of
> > >>> the fielder than with the action of the runner. “Was the runner going
> > all
> > >>> the time? Did he never think about stopping at first? Or was he
> running
> > >> and
> > >>> looking at the play and then slowed down a little bit and then took
> off
> > >>> when he saw the little bauble?” If he paused, noticed the misplay,
> and
> > >> ran
> > >>> to second, “That becomes the error.”
> > >>> —
> > >>>
> > >> Nice.  I’m sure that’s what it is—in our colleague’s terms,
> > “awe”-dropping
> > >> strikes again.  And here I thought a bauble becomes an error only when
> > you
> > >> get cold feet before the wedding and seek to become disengaged.  Tough
> > to
> > >> sort out those diamond miscues.
> > >>
> > >
> > > The "baubles" have now been changed to "bobbles" by an unmerged editor.
> > >
> > > —bgz
> >
> > Very sad.  I was really attached to the diamond miscue motif.  I was
> > wondering if you get shifts in the other direction, and searching “fancy
> > bobble” pulls up a couple, including one from _On the Wings of a Dove_, a
> > novel not written by Henry James:
> >
> > “Yes, son, three dollars is a lot of money but your Ma is worth every
> > penny of it. Some day I hope you will find yourself a girl to love as
> much
> > as I love your ma. When you do you likely will find yourself willing to
> > spend the last penny you have in your pocket to buy her a fancy bobble
> just
> > like I’m gonna do now”.
> > https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1504344235
> >
> > “expensive bobble” fetches a plethora of expensive bobble-head dolls.
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

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