• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Mandela Effect: False Memory

Here's an example: the word 'gunsel'. It now means something like 'a criminal with a gun' but that meaning comes from a deliberate misdirection by that genius Dashiell Hammett.

What is a gunsel?

You have to admire Dashiell Hammett for using a corrupted Yiddish word to pull the wool over his jittery editor’s eyes in 1929 when the Black Mask ran the serialized version of his The Maltese Falcon, which would be released as a novel in 1930.

Hammett’s editor objected to his use of the word “catamite” in referring to Casper Gutman’s gunman Wilmer Cook. A catamite is “a boy kept by an older man for homosexual practices.”

Oh, my, we can’t have people reading that.

OK, Hammett said, you don’t like catamite. How about gunsel?

Thinking it was another word for a torpedo or hit man, the editor agreed and, without knowing what the result would be, Hammett singlehandedly brought the word into Hollywood lexicon.

Gunsel is taken from the Yiddish word gendzel, meaning little goose. Somehow, the corrupted form, gunsel, became the term for a young homosexual male in convict and tramp circles.
Click to expand...
 
Mythopoeika said:
Spot-on!
I remember when I was studying 'A' level history. At school, we were told that we could use whatever sources that were available in the library.
I failed that 'A' level, but decided to retake it at a college of FE. At the college, we were told to stick to the set text, which was a book by Asa Briggs. This gave our research a certain bias, as seen through a political filter. At one point, I decided to do some really detailed research for one assignment, so I pulled together lots of source books and cited them all painstakingly. The history teacher told me off for doing that! One thing I did find out was that not all historical sources agree with each other, even for basic details such as dates.
Click to expand...
Did you pass the A-level the second time?
 
JudSawyer said:
Did you pass the A-level the second time?
Click to expand...
Actually, no. I lost all interest, because of the extremist attitudes of that teacher. There was a huge drop-out rate for that class, almost 50%.
I didn't know what was fact and what was politically-filtered. My OCD and my need to nail down the facts meant that I was at odds with that teacher and I couldn't make the effort to commit details to memory if I wasn't able to verify them.
I already have problems with remembering things, but that environment did not help at all.
 
That’s why I use self-deprecation, whimsy, absurd and surreal wordplay. It’s harder to pin down. Often, I don’t bother to make the point, I just lead people towards it and let them come to the conclusion.

Should they be arsed.
 
pandacracker said:
The sound of P and B are the made the same way but one is voiced the other unvoiced (like F and V, G and K etc)

Have I got that right @Yithian?
Click to expand...

Oh my, the letters we call 'b' and 'v' here are completely interchangeable in Nepali and (IIRC) north Indian Hindi. It's very confusing when participating in family conversations in Nep-lish* - are we talking about (for example) Bishnu bhai or Vishnu vhai? (two completely different younger male relatives with the kinship term of 'little brother').

Mr J can't really hear any difference in the sounds of the letters. Myself, I can't hear any difference in the 'th' used in eg., 'Kathmandu' and a plain hard t.

Totally off-topic as my memories are perfectly conguent about this :)

*alternatively Eng-ali
 
Luckily, during my degree course I have a very wide-range of reference material to search through. So I can usually find at least two sources of my information; if they've come from the same single source then I assume it'd be spotted by peer revue?
 
AnonyJ said:
Oh my, the letters we call 'b' and 'v' here are completely interchangeable in Nepali and (IIRC) north Indian Hindi.
Click to expand...
That's interesting because Spanish speakers (from Spain at least), say a sort of soft bu-vu so that very comes out as bvery.

There's also a connection in Hebrew as you can see from the two similar letters bet and vet - only changed by a dagesh (dot);
 

Attachments

  • bet.jpg
    bet.jpg
    2.9 KB · Views: 6
brownmane said:
Exactly. When I first joined the internet world as late as 2009 (for school studies), I quickly realized how useless the internet is for any type of reliable information.

It quickly became apparent that any references I tried to cite for my essays that I had researched online would ultimately lead back to a single source. We know that this is not valid research when you only have a single source. I found the internet ridiculously useless for much well researched information.

Of course, now we refer to the echo chambers that many people are caught up in. This was apparent to me as soon as I tried to find information over 10 years ago. The internet was designed to do this.

People now are ignorantly unaware of how to source information and how to critique the veracity of what is told to them. One source does not make it true.
Click to expand...
And this is how truly appalling spelling errors are taking over.

I've just been over on Mumsnet. On a first post, the poster has misspelled 'sneery' as 'sneary'. One after another all subsequent posters have ALSO misspelled it as 'sneary'. I suppose that, with it being a word not often used, people have read it and wondered how it was spelled and whether they've been spelling it wrongly as 'sneery', taking the first post as correct and replicating the error.

Now there is going to be a whole cohort of people who misspell sneery!
 
catseye said:
And this is how truly appalling spelling errors are taking over.

I've just been over on Mumsnet. On a first post, the poster has misspelled 'sneery' as 'sneary'. One after another all subsequent posters have ALSO misspelled it as 'sneary'. I suppose that, with it being a word not often used, people have read it and wondered how it was spelled and whether they've been spelling it wrongly as 'sneery', taking the first post as correct and replicating the error.

Now there is going to be a whole cohort of people who misspell sneery!
Click to expand...
That's probably called 'progressive language!'
 
catseye said:
And this is how truly appalling spelling errors are taking over.

I've just been over on Mumsnet. On a first post, the poster has misspelled 'sneery' as 'sneary'. One after another all subsequent posters have ALSO misspelled it as 'sneary'. I suppose that, with it being a word not often used, people have read it and wondered how it was spelled and whether they've been spelling it wrongly as 'sneery', taking the first post as correct and replicating the error.

Now there is going to be a whole cohort of people who misspell sneery!
Click to expand...
And now you can heartily sneer at them :chuckle:.
 
I have heard some people (when speaking) using "weary" instead of "wary" a few times lately to describe being cautious/suspicious. I wonder where this began - is it that people are pronouncing wary in this way now? Is it an accent thing? I don't know. Or is it that the words have got muddled up somehow? I'm interested in the how and why rather than feeling superior to anyone else. I never confront anyone when I hear it as I don't want someone to think I am being a stuck up know it all.....I do find it puzzling.
 
catseye said:
And this is how truly appalling spelling errors are taking over.

I've just been over on Mumsnet. On a first post, the poster has misspelled 'sneery' as 'sneary'. One after another all subsequent posters have ALSO misspelled it as 'sneary'. I suppose that, with it being a word not often used, people have read it and wondered how it was spelled and whether they've been spelling it wrongly as 'sneery', taking the first post as correct and replicating the error.

Now there is going to be a whole cohort of people who misspell sneery!
Click to expand...
I've seen 'skiddish' more often than 'skittish' on horse sites in the last few years :(
 
Earthly oddity said:
I have heard some people (when speaking) using "weary" instead of "wary" a few times lately to describe being cautious/suspicious. I wonder where this began - is it that people are pronouncing wary in this way now? Is it an accent thing? I don't know. Or is it that the words have got muddled up somehow? I'm interested in the how and why rather than feeling superior to anyone else. I never confront anyone when I hear it as I don't want someone to think I am being a stuck up know it all.....I do find it puzzling.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't confront, as in challenge someone's pronunciation, but would ask if they mean wary or weary. They mean two different things and I need to know which in order to understand what they are telling me.

I know many people whose native language is not English. I don't think they feel that I am correcting them. We do have discussions about what word means what.

A person I have known for years and is Iraqi has a small company in which he publishes books translated from English to Arabic.

He will read a part of an article that has been translated by another to ask me if a word is used correctly. Often there is a slight difference in definition, but the way in which one or the other is used as an English speaker is very nuanced, but can change the tone or intent of what he wants conveyed.
 
I've always considered words important, and it's instructive of the way people use them.
Some are used to sound clever but, if used out of context, has the opposite effect. Sadly, when people carry on using the 'wrong' word it reflects badly on them too.
You don't need to correct the first user ... just use the correct one without comment.
It has been said that the words don't matter as long as the meaning is understood, but the incorrect use of words can corrupt that meaning and so the initial intent becomes incorrect.
 
Stormkhan said:
Some are used to sound clever but, if used out of context, has the opposite effect. Sadly, when people carry on using the 'wrong' word it reflects badly on them too.
Click to expand...

I try not to let it annoy me(!), but some common misuses of English do grind my gears somewhat.

TV presenters who say "I" instead of "me", just to try and sound more educated, are a prime example. "You're going to need to cook up something special to impress Gregg and I". Like fingernails down a blackboard...

I've noticed recently a tendency for people to say "honing in" when they mean "homing in". Is that language slippage, or just a mishearing?
 
Peripart said:
I try not to let it annoy me(!), but some common misuses of English do grind my gears somewhat.

TV presenters who say "I" instead of "me", just to try and sound more educated, are a prime example. "You're going to need to cook up something special to impress Gregg and I". Like fingernails down a blackboard...

I've noticed recently a tendency for people to say "honing in" when they mean "homing in". Is that language slippage, or just a mishearing?
Click to expand...
Is it honing, or homing? Or is there a distinct difference between the two?

https://usdictionary.com/idioms/honing-in/
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/home-in-or-hone-in

Seems like you can use either-or?
 
Sid said:
Is it honing, or homing? Or is there a distinct difference between the two?

https://usdictionary.com/idioms/honing-in/
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/home-in-or-hone-in

Seems like you can use either-or?
Click to expand...

Not sure. I reckon that the definition of "honing in" has been created retroactively (in "my" universe, at least) to justify the use of a possibly misheard phrase. Even that definition doesn't really distinguish the meanings of the variants.

To me, it's always been "homing", like a pigeon. "Honing" is more pidgin.

EDITED TO ADD: and I guess that's where we came in - different perceptions and memories.
 
Last edited:
Peripart said:
I try not to let it annoy me(!), but some common misuses of English do grind my gears somewhat.

TV presenters who say "I" instead of "me", just to try and sound more educated, are a prime example. "You're going to need to cook up something special to impress Gregg and I". Like fingernails down a blackboard...

I've noticed recently a tendency for people to say "honing in" when they mean "homing in". Is that language slippage, or just a mishearing?
Click to expand...
For me it's the use of 'myself' instead of 'me' that's driving me nuts. However, I believe there is a pedantry thread somewhere on the forum, and I need to be pedantic and point out its presence before the thread is derailed.
 
RE: "My husband and I ..." misuse.
In my opinion, it boils down to it being used as a famous opening to the Queens Speech ages ago. People assume that was the correct usage; after all, the Queen didn't say "My husband and me ..." Absolutely correct, she wouldn't. However, if she'd said "It occurred to my husband and me that ..." this would be correct too.
So, erroneously, folks say 'My husband and I' when they really mean 'my husband and me'.
Isn't it the difference between a collective subject and a collective object?
 
catseye said:
For me it's the use of 'myself' instead of 'me' that's driving me nuts. However, I believe there is a pedantry thread somewhere on the forum, and I need to be pedantic and point out its presence before the thread is derailed.
Click to expand...
Common amongst footballers for some reason-

‘Degsy played a great through ball to myself & luckily I put it away’.
 
Peripart said:
Not sure. I reckon that the definition of "honing in" has been created retroactively (in "my" universe, at least) to justify the use of a possibly misheard phrase. Even that definition doesn't really distinguish the meanings of the variants.

To me, it's always been "homing", like a pigeon. "Honing" is more pidgin.

EDITED TO ADD: and I guess that's where we came in - different perceptions and memories.
Click to expand...
I see both as those words that have similar meanings, but nuanced moreso when used.

Homing in - I can understand as "aiming towards", or "directed towards".

Honing in - I can understand as "sharpening", or "making clearer".

In this sense, imo, the words are both being used to give the understanding that something is being described or defined into better detail or to bring a clearer understanding. But the nuanced understanding of each of these words gives them a totally different intent.

If any of that makes sense.:thought:
 
In fairness and an acceptance of a footballer being great at ... football rather than public speaking, I suspect that the usage is 'homing'.
They've probably heard managers, coaches, etc. using it in tactics.
And managers etc. aren't really 'wordsmiths'.
Proposition?
"I want to talk about getting a good sight on a goal and I got it."
Situation.
Interviewed shortly after the end of the game:
"(internal dialogue) I am aiming so 'homing' is suitable, yet I want to express my focus so should I use 'honing'?"
These guys are paid thousands per day for what they do and not their language usage.
Declaration: I've ever only used the word 'honing' when discussing the sharpening of blades. I understand the concept of picturesque usage ... but bollocks. Dancing angels on the pinhead of needles or whatever. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top