Malapropism

A malapropism (also called a malaprop or Dogberryism) is the use of an incorrect word in place of a word with a similar sound, resulting in a nonsensical, sometimes humorous utterance. An example is the statement by baseball player Yogi Berra, “Texas has a lot of electrical votes”, rather than “electoral votes“.^[1] Malapropisms often occur as errors in natural speech and are sometimes the subject of media attention, especially when made by politicians or other prominent individuals. Philosopher Donald Davidson has noted that malapropisms show the complex process through which the brain translates thoughts into language.

Humorous malapropisms are the type that attract the most attention and commentary, but bland malapropisms are common in speech and writing.

Etymology

The word “malapropism” (and its earlier variant “malaprop”) comes from a character named “Mrs. Malaprop” in Richard Brinsley Sheridan‘s 1775 play The Rivals.^[2] Mrs. Malaprop frequently misspeaks (to comic effect) by using words which don’t have the meaning that she intends but which sound similar to words that do. Sheridan presumably chose her name in humorous reference to the word malapropos, an adjective or adverb meaning “inappropriate” or “inappropriately”, derived from the French phrase mal à propos (literally “poorly placed”). According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first recorded use of “malapropos” in English is from 1630,^[3] and the first person known to have used the word “malaprop” in the sense of “a speech error” is Lord Byron in 1814.^[4]

The synonymous term “Dogberryism” comes from the 1598 Shakespeare play Much Ado About Nothing in which the character Dogberry utters many malapropisms to humorous effect.^[5] Though Shakespeare was an earlier writer than Sheridan, “malaprop/malapropism” seems an earlier coinage than “Dogberryism”, which is not attested until 1836.^[6]

Distinguishing features

An instance of speech error is called a malapropism when a word is produced which is nonsensical or ludicrous in context, yet similar in sound to what was intended.^[7]

Definitions differ somewhat in terms of the cause of the error. Some scholars include only errors that result from a temporary failure to produce the word which the speaker intended.^[8] Such errors are sometimes called “Fay-Cutler malapropism”, after David Fay and Anne Cutler, who described the occurrence of such errors in ordinary speech.^[7][9] Most definitions, however, include any actual word that is wrongly or accidentally used in place of a similar sounding, correct word. This broader definition is sometimes called “classical malapropism”,^[9] or simply “malapropism”.^[7]

Malapropisms differ from other kinds of speaking or writing mistakes, such as eggcorns or spoonerisms, and from the accidental or deliberate production of newly made-up words (neologisms).^[9]

For example, it is not a malapropism to use obtuse [wide or dull] instead of acute [narrow or sharp]; it is a malapropism to use obtuse [stupid or slow-witted] when one means abstruse [esoteric or difficult to understand].

Malapropisms tend to maintain the part of speech of the originally intended word. According to linguist Jean Aitchison, “The finding that word selection errors preserve their part of speech suggest that the latter is an integral part of the word, and tightly attached to it.”^[10] Likewise, substitutions tend to have the same number of syllables and the same metrical structure – the same pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables – as the intended word or phrase. If the stress pattern of the malapropism differs from the intended word, unstressed syllables may be deleted or inserted; stressed syllables and the general rhythmic pattern are maintained.^[10]

Examples from fiction

The fictional Mrs. Malaprop in Sheridan’s play The Rivals utters many malapropisms. In Act 3 Scene III, she declares to Captain Absolute, “Sure, if I reprehend any thing in this world it is the use of my oraculartongue, and a nice derangement of epitaphs!”^[11] This nonsensical utterance might, for example, be corrected to, “If I apprehend anything in this world, it is the use of my vernacular tongue, and a nice arrangement of epithets“,^[12] —although these are not the only words that can be substituted to produce an appropriately expressed thought in this context, and commentators have proposed other possible replacements that work just as well.

Other malapropisms spoken by Mrs. Malaprop include “illiterate him quite from your memory” (instead of “obliterate”), and “she’s as headstrong as an allegory” (instead of alligator).^[11]

Malapropisms appeared in many works before Sheridan created the character of Mrs. Malaprop. William Shakespeare used them in a number of his plays, almost invariably spoken by comic ill-educated lower class characters. Mistress Quickly, the inn-keeper associate of Falstaff in several Shakespeare plays, is a regular user of malapropisms.^[13] In Much Ado About Nothing, Constable Dogberry tells Governor Leonato, “Our watch, sir, have indeed comprehended two auspicious persons” (i.e., apprehended two suspicious persons) (Act 3, Scene V).^[14]

Modern writers make use of malapropisms in novels, cartoons, films, television, and other media.

Malapropism was one of Stan Laurel‘s comic mannerisms. In Sons Of The Desert, for example, he says that Oliver Hardy is suffering a nervous “shakedown” (rather than “breakdown”), and calls the Exalted Ruler of their group the “exhausted ruler”; in The Music Box, he inadvertently asked a policeman, “Don’t you think you’re bounding over your steps?” meaning “stepping over your bounds” – which Hardy corrected, causing the cop to get more angry at him.^[15] British comedian Ronnie Barker also made great use of deliberate malapropisms in his comedy, notably in such sketches as his “Appeal on behalf of the Loyal Society for the Relief of Suffers from Pismronunciation”, which mixed malapropisms and garbled words for comic effect – including news of a speech which “gave us a few well-frozen worms (i.e., well-chosen words) in praise of the society.”^{[16][non-primary source needed]}

Archie Bunker, a character in the American TV sitcom All in the Family, is also known for malapropisms. He calls Orthodox Jews “off-the-docks Jews” and refers to “the Women’s Lubrication Movement” (rather than Liberation).^[17]

Real-life examples

Malapropisms do not occur only as comedic literary devices. They also occur as a kind of speech error in ordinary speech.^[8] Examples are often quoted in the media. Welsh Conservative leader Andrew Davies, encouraged the Conservative party conference to make breakfast (i.e. Brexit) a success. Bertie Ahern, former Taoiseach of Ireland, warned his country against “upsetting the apple tart” (i.e., apple cart) of his country’s economic success.^[18][19]

Former Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley referred to a tandem bicycle as a “tantrum bicycle” and made mention of “Alcoholics Unanimous” (Alcoholics Anonymous).^[20]

Australian politician Tony Abbott once claimed that no one “is the suppository of all wisdom” (i.e., repository or depository).^[21] Similarly, as reported in New Scientist, an office worker had described a colleague as “a vast suppository of information”. The worker then apologised for his “Miss-Marple-ism” (i.e. malapropism).^[22] New Scientist noted this as possibly the first time anyone had uttered a malapropism for the word malapropism itself.

Texas governor Rick Perry has been known to commonly utter malapropisms, for example describing states as “lavatories of innovation and democracy” instead of “laboratories”.^[23]

During a Senate hearing, Philippine presidential communications assistant secretary Mocha Uson stumbled on the legal phrase “right against self-incrimination” by invoking her “right against self-discrimination” instead.^[24]

Philosophical implications

In his essay “A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs”, philosopher Donald Davidson suggests that malapropisms reveal something about how people process the meanings of words. He argues that language competence must not simply involve learning a set meaning for each word, and then rigidly applying those semantic rules to decode other people’s utterances. Rather, he says, people must also be continually making use of other contextual information to interpret the meaning of utterances, and then modifying their understanding of each word’s meaning based on those interpretations.

Further reading

• Weingarten, Gene. (2014-02-16) “An add homonym attack” Retrieved 2014-02-25.

External links

• The dictionary definition of malapropism at Wiktionary