I love the shot at cummerbund (which, by the way, is Persian for “loin-band”):

A broad waist sash worn with dinner jackets and tuxedos, a cummerbund sounds more like a grammatical error you might learn to avoid in 8th grade English class. “Molly, your sentence had a incorrect gerund, a dangling preposition and an awkward cummerbund. Please re-write.”

In language land, The Frisky might be interested to note the linguistic terms that sound a bit rompish. For instance, take the title of the blog itself: The Frisky. You see the (wink-wink) tittle there, right? Yes, I spelled it right. Tittle. That’s the dot above the letter i. Cross your T’s, and tittle your I’s. Sounds positively ribald.

There were a couple of inventive names I’d not seen before. “Moonswiners,” “Charlotte’s Rib,” “Pellet Envy” and “The Will Deal Catering and BBQ Co.” tested the limits of punning, and “Carcass Cookers” and “4 Legs Up BBQ” brought a bit of smokey poetry to the game. Other than those, and others I’ve already chronicled (such as “Natural Born Grillers”), the names weren’t nearly as delightful as I’d hoped. But then again, these teams were in Lynchburg to compete in Jack Daniel’s cooking competition, not my private wordplay competition. And 4 Legs Up BBQ won the competition they had set out from Great Bend, Kansas, to win.

Word-roasting aside, I was happy with our days visiting friends, sampling BBQ, quaffing beers (but no Jack Daniel’s—how did I let that happen?). How happy? Happy as one of the teams that’s been around for a while. Happy as:

By the by, you can read my chapter on competitive BBQ team names, at “Sing a Song of Pig Puns, Pocket Full of Wry.”

Fellow snarker JohnnyB—just about the only one of the group able to honor the commitment—chastised us thusly:

Just read this in Everything You Know About English Is Wrong:

The phrase “mark your calendar” does not mean “write this event in on your calendar so you won’t schedule something else in that same time period.”

“Mark your calendar” is a bastardization, by bastards, of a Latin term “mar curcalen dare” meaning “I challenge you to swirl around in the sea,” which means nothing.

As does my commitment to dinner engagements, apparently. And as does today’s post, here just for the fun of it.

Years ago I attended a business convention in the city of Elision, Louisiana.

Elision is not the name of the city, though it certainly sounds like a good Cajun name—the convention was in New Orleans. Before I left, a colleague asked me, “When you’re down there, find something out for me. Is the city name pronounced with four syllables—new-or-lee-ans—or three—new-or-leens?”

On my return, I reported: “One: nawlns.”

Elision is the act of eliminating letters or syllables when pronouncing a word. Think of libary instead of library, wershester sauce instead of worcestershire sauce, dint instead of didn’t. (The opposite—inserting letters or syllables in pronunciation, as in sherbert instead of sherbet—might be known as “anti-elision” or “confusion.” And who the hell knows what it’s called in instances like Farve instead of Favre.)

And while we’re on the topic, I hereby declare today National Elision Day. Why today of all days? It’s Wensday, of course . . .

(And, oh yeah—Arlo Guthrie? He votes for three syllables:)

• social notworking
• murketing

Interestingly, both are business-related, which, I might venture, may be mostly a function of changing business conditions fueling the need for coinage (pun absolutely intended).

As coinages, these two words represent opposites of sorts:

Social notworking is the blatant pun, used to describe “Surfing a social networking site instead of working.” Call it social porn.

Murketing is a subtler construction, possibly considered a pun and possibly considered a portmanteau—meshing two words (murky and marketing). Murketing describes “A form of marketing where the product or service is not mentioned or shown” (think of those TV ads that leave you with that deep “Huh?”-response.) Whereas notworking is an opposite of the original word, murketing is a shade of the original—a quieter shade.

These represent neology at its worst because on their surfaces, neither word accomplishes what their definitions claim they do. To my ear, social notworking speaks a cynical implication that social networking itself is not working, rather than workers are not working because of social networking. And to that same ear (or maybe the other one), murketing sounds equally cynical, a drudging insult with surreptitious resonances of murk—not only the dark, clouded denotations of the word itself, but also the swallowed, secretive pronunciation of the word when spoken aloud. Marketing is a happier, broader, more open word. Murketing is a huddling, skulking word.

So why are these examples of neology at its best? I’m a cynic; I’d like to think that my suggested misinterpretations are true.

By the by, Mr. Everything You Know About English Is Wrong now looks forward to quitting his day job and notworking when he receives expected checks from all major companies—as in this blog he has not mentioned or shown any of your products or services. He’s a murketing genius!

Hydrox cookies were introduced in 1908 by Sunshine Biscuits. Competitor Oreo came double-rolling along in 1912. (Neither of which are my time, in case you were wondering.) Eighty-eight years later, Keebler swallowed up the Biscuits, and Kellogg subsequently gobbled up the elves in an apparent quest to monopolize companies beginning with K. Comes 2003, and Kellogg dropped the cookie brand, since renamed (more on that in a moment).

Fading sales apparently doomed Hydrox. I’ve not seen a lot of detail on what might have forced a sales decline, but I’ll offer a possible contributor. The name.

Certainly, a number of factors worked against Hydrox, though the product itself is not likely at fault given how ravenous the fandom is (apparently phone calls and letter-writing inspired the revival). But for the moment consider a name that I don’t think aged very well, one that now sounds like a plant food, a faucet-spigot cleaner, a character in a Douglas Adams novel, or Godzilla’s next wrestling partner. Hydrox wandered into later decades that were characterized by product-naming mania, particularly in the tech, pharmaceuticals and household cleaning product sectors. And in fact, a Hydrox Laboratories (slogan, “Solutions for Your Solutions”—honest) issues a line of beauty and health care products, ranging from facial astringent to perineum wash to kiwi melon shampoo (which probably doesn’t taste too good between chocolate wafers).

The Hydrox name is a portmanteau of the atomic components of water: hydrogen and oxygen (water . . . cookie . . . get the connection? because I don’t). Keebler in infinite elfin wisdom changed the name to Droxies. Catchy, eh? Or maybe I should say, Catchies? I’m not sure what Droxies sounds like, but of all the possibilities, none of them seems edible. Kellogg made dropsy with the Droxies, but now on the cookie’s hundredth anniversary the company is bringing the brand back for a while.

That makes me happy for the cookie’s many fans. To them, I say enjoy. Myself, I’m going to slink into a corner and pout until they bring back Screaming Yellow Zonkers.

Nancy over at the Fritinancy blog snarked yesterday about a recent press release using the phrase “plutonic relationships” when more than a few of us know that the subject was actually “platonic relationships.”

Nancy’s sharp introduction to the malapropism was . . .

If Men Are from Mars … and women are from Venus, are some relationships from Pluto?

Ensuing comment from “WIIIAI” from the Whatever It Is, I’m Against It blog:

Evidently many people wish to hook up with someone who looks like a cartoon dog, or possibly someone who is small and icy, with an eccentric orbit, who thinks they’re a planetary celestial body, but really aren’t.

Ensuing comment from “Q. Pheevr” from the A Roguish Chrestomathy blog:

The thesis expressed in [Nancy's] quotation from Blubet, with its reference to “a hidden sexual desire or chemistry that secretly sparks between them,” actually resonates rather nicely with the OED’s definition of the geological sense of the word ‘plutonic’: “Pertaining to or involving the action of intense heat at great depths upon the rocks forming the earth’s crust; igneous.”

Ensuing comment from yours truly who non-humbly had to jump into the fray, herein semi-humbly presented:

Further to Q. Pheevr’s point, I suspect that “plutonic” relationships may actually source back to “plutonium” and not “pluto” (neither former planet nor dog). My evidence is that like plutonium, platonic relationships have half lives.

All this can be summed up as a matter of preference in these matters of love, of course: You say pla-tato, I say plu-tuto; let’s call the whole thing off.

Who would have thought that candy could be so educational? Our audiovisual aid today:

Tart in its various forms has various origins:

• The sweet: as in the dessert tart, coming to English in the 1200s from French.
• The tart: as in the adjective tart, meaning “sharp, piquant,” originating from an Old English word teart, with intense meanings of pain and suffering
• The sweet and tart: as in the pejorative tart applied to prostitutes, promiscuous women and occasionally men. This version of the word was sweet in that it was used in a positive sense when it appeared around the mid 1800s; it took pejorative connotations not long after.

So where does the candy come in? SweeTarts is a cleverly effective name in that it describes the confection’s sweet/sour flavors while recalling the positive word sweetheart. Significant to the word lovers among us is the fact that it almost certainly displays in its SweeTart/sweetheart pun the true origin of the once-nice now-pejorative noun tart. No, not the spicy nature of a type of woman. The heart of your sweetheart.

We’re not precisely sure how the word originated, but the two most likely explanations involve either a shortening of sweetheart or a shortening of jam-tart, a Cockney rhyming slang version of sweetheart.

Now class, your assignment includes reading four bags of M&Ms to prep for both spelling and math class next week.

I was talking about . . . it will come to me . .  Peel, a homonym of peal, which rhymes with heal, a homonym of heel, which is a subject of fashion blogs, which . . . Oh yeah! Nancy’s primary subject (well, to her anyway) was mistaken words and phrases, with examples from fashion blogs. Such blogs, Nancy writes, “sometimes allow their enthusiasm for the subject to override their inner spellcheckers. (I’d assumed that most people learned the difference between heel and heal in, say, fourth grade, but such is apparently not the case.)” But homonym failure is a side topic in this particular Fritinancy post. The real topic is Diana Rigg.

Or . . . something else. The topic was . . . I remember now: eggcorns. The subject was “eggcorns,” also known as “mondegreens”: words and phrases created by mishearing the source words and phrases. (My earliest personal eggcorn affliction was thinking John Fogerty and Creedence sang not “There’s a bad moon on the rise” but “Hail the bathroom on the right”). While listing various eggcorns Nancy has seen in fashion blogs, she writes:

“With avengence.” Oh, I love this one. I spotted it in a comment to a funny/alarming Daily Mail (UK) article on age-inappropriate fashion: Carol wrote that her husband “hates [her gypsy skirts] with avengence [sic].” Here we have “a vengeance” compressed into a package that folds in the concept of to avenge (to take vengeance on behalf of). Carol may also be under the lingering influence of The Avengers. Can you believe that Diana Rigg just turned 70? I’ll bet she looks fab in gypsy skirts.

Umm, what was the subject? (Concentrate, Brohaugh, concentrate.) Eggcorns! Another eggcorn Nancy identifies is the frequent misunderstanding of midriff as midrift. I don’t understand why this is surprising, as my own mid has been drifting for some time now.

I just hope Diana doesn’t notice.

And while we’re at it, here are some Avenger moments of thesauretical banter, cliche reversal, verbal fencing, undercover wordplay, cleverly unintelligible military jargon—and John Steed’s misdirected taste in women: