Archive for the ‘Chiasmus’ Category
November 14, 2019
The Wayno/Piraro Bizarro collabo from the 9th:
(#1) If you’re puzzled by the odd symbols in the cartoon — Dan Piraro says there are 2 in this strip — see this Page. Meanwhile, the pie segments run through the flavors in the order named, clockwise from the pumpkin segment at the top.
Transpositional wordplay of an especially simple sort, involving a two-word expression, with X Y ~ Y X — in this case taking off from a conventional N + N compound, the metaphorical pie chart ‘chart resembling a pie’, and reversing the parts to yield the novel, and entertaining, (also metaphorical) compound chart pie ‘pie resembling a chart’.
The model expression pie chart refers to an object familiar in our culture, while the play expression chart pie refers to something novel and surprising: a pie made up of segments drawn from various different pies. Not a combination or mixed pie, like the familiar strawberry rhurbarb pie — a kind of hybrid pie — but instead a composite (‘made up of various parts or elements’ (NOAD) or chimerical pie, with distinct parts taken from different pies. (On chimeras, see my 11/13 posting “The chimera of Faneuil Hall”.)
(more…)
Posted in Chiasmus, Compounds, Errors, Figurative language, Gender and sexuality, Homosexuality, Language and food, Language play, Linguistics in the comics, Metaphor, Word exchanges / reversals | 1 Comment »
June 1, 2018
It’s been a while since I posted chiastic (transpositional, Spooneristic) wordplay, so here’s a Bizarro from 12/16/08:
(#1)
The title To Kill a Mockingbird –> To Mock a Killingbird by transposition (exchange, reversal), of kill and mock (the sort of exchange seen in Spoonerisms as inadvertent errors). Formally of interest because the process “goes into” a compound word, to affect one of its parts (mocking), and also into an affixed word, to affect its base (mock). On the conceptual side, this particular kind of wordplay is shallow, thin, since only one of the two paired situations is represented in the cartoon: having served its purpose as base for transposition, the book To Kill a Mockingbird plays no further role in the proceedings.
(more…)
Posted in Ambiguity, Books, Chiasmus, Errors, Language play, Linguistics in the comics, Word exchanges / reversals | 1 Comment »
May 19, 2017
(Men’s underwear, but nothing hard-core.)
The Daily Jocks ad from the 9th, featuring the Marco Marco brand, with my caption:
(#1)
Maximum Marco in boxer briefs.
Middle Marco in briefs.
Minimal Marco in almost nothing,
Beyond the pecs, the abs, and the thighs,
Nothing like one another, but they’re
Totally tight —
All three for Subcomandante Marcos, the
Subcomandante for all of them.
Four things here: the Marco Marco firm, which is trés gai; the play on All for one and one for all (most famously alluding to the motto of the Three Musketeers)); the play on Marcos the plural of the personal name Marco vs. the surname Marcos; and the reference to the Zapatista leader Subcomandante Marcos. Plus a whiff of an allusion to Goldilocks and the Three Bears (Marco Midi is just right). And of course the differences in the three men’s body types.
(more…)
Posted in Captions, Chiasmus, Figurative language, Formulaic language, Gender and sexuality, Language and the body, Language play, Underwear | 1 Comment »
May 25, 2015
Today’s Rhymes With Orange:
(Note the title: “Linguistics 101”.)
For the people:
We call them pets because we pet them.
For the cats:
We call them feeds because they feed us.
The two cases of nouning aren’t parallel, but reversed — in a sense, chiastic.
May 26th. Note of etymological truth, which I playfully omitted in the original posting. This is a cute story for pet, but it’s etymologically backwards. The noun came first, for ‘indulged child’, then for ‘animal companion’, and then the verb was derived from the noun, meaning something on the order of ‘to treat like a pet’, specifically ‘to stroke’.
Posted in Chiasmus, Lexical semantics, Linguistics in the comics, Nouning | 1 Comment »
May 17, 2015
From Benita Bendon Campbell, a riddle and its answer:
I wondered about the source of the image and of the riddle. (Bonnie found this version on the Writer’s Circle Facebook group, with no indication of its earlier history.) The riddle has appeared with quite a collection of artwork (on ecards, in particular), none of it attributed, and some posters characterize it as “an old riddle”, but that just might mean that they recall it from when they were younger; we could be looking at the Antiquity Illusion here.
(more…)
Posted in Ambiguity, Chiasmus, Language play, Riddles | 1 Comment »
January 24, 2015
The Comics Kingdom site tells me that the 21st was the 30th anniversary of Bizarro comics by Don Piraro, the first having been published on 1/21/85. Here are two Bizarros with linguistic content that haven’t been blogged on here: one from 12/18/13, one from much earlier, possibly from 3/29/89 (I have trouble reading the data):
(#1)
(#2)
(more…)
Posted in Ambiguity, Chiasmus, Compounds, Figurative language, Linguistics in the comics | Leave a Comment »
April 29, 2013
My iTunes woke me this morning with “The Further Adventures of Nick Danger, Third Eye” (from Firesign Theatre’s How Can You Be in Two Places at Once When You’re Not Anywhere at All (1969)). It’s packed full of playfulness, silliness, and absurdity, much of it linguistic.
(more…)
Posted in Ambiguity, Chiasmus, Clipping, Idioms, Language play, Names, Pop culture, Portmanteaus, Puns, Semantics, Silliness, Spoonerisms | 3 Comments »
