It's A Doggie Dog World?

     Mr. Language Man is at it again.  Yet another tirade about the misuse of the English language.  If you are tired of this topic, stop reading now.

     “It’s a doggie dog world.”  Yes, I actually read this on a paper written by a school teacher.  This teacher had apparently heard the expression, “It’s a dog-eat-dog world” at some point, but she likely had never watched a couple of dogs fighting fiercely over a scrap of food.  So, based on her prior knowledge, or the lack thereof, the only thing that made sense to her was a “doggie dog” world.  How a “doggie world” could mean “fight for your very existence” baffles me, but evidently made sense to her.

     Children make these mistakes all the time.  They are constantly in the process of attaining knowledge that will help them interpret other phrases, slogans, and proverbs in the future.  I remember when my son heard a song in which the singer, referring to the power of God working in him, exclaimed, “There’s something potent inside of me.”  Later I heard my son singing, “There’s something pokin’ inside of me.”  He had, quite naturally, replaced the word he didn’t know with one he did know.  The problem with both the teacher’s and my son’s replacement words is that neither of them made any sense in the context.

     I, like so many other of my generation and older, grew up reading and being read to from the classic literature that has given our culture so many pithy sayings.  Aesop’s fables, Grimm Fairy Tales, and others like them are full of expressions Americans need to know in order to converse effectively.  I am sure I would receive some strange looks if I was to refer to someone as a “dog in a manger.”  First, many people would have no knowledge of what a manger is, or would only be able to associate it with the Christmas story.  Aesop told of a dog resting in a manger, a feeding trough for cattle, when some cattle approached to eat.  The dog snarled, defending his manger full of hay, keeping the cattle from eating something which the dog could not eat.  One cow said to another, "He doesn't need it himself yet he won't let us have it, the selfish beast."

     I recently heard a news personality (I reserve the title of journalist for those very few news people who know something about journalism) use the term “coming down the pipe.”  The story had nothing to do with a pipe or pipeline, so I was left to conjecture that he meant “coming down the pike.”  A pike was a long, straight pole used as a weapon and then used to block a private road or a public road requiring a toll.  If something is coming down the pike, it is making a straight and certain journey to me.  It will arrive soon.

     Other expressions derived from Aesop include “sour grapes,” “lion’s share,” and “slow and steady wins the race.”  People who have not been educated in the classic moral tales of Aesop and others like him, will not know how to interpret or use some very old and common expressions. 

    Ignorance is not always bliss.  Many people adopt idioms without knowing their origins, and in so doing may embarrass themselves.  Obviously, used over a very long period of time, even the nastiest idiom may become a neutral phrase, since neither the person using it nor the person hearing it have any idea of its origin.  “Rule of thumb” is one example.  Who really cares if this originated as a law to keep men from beating their wives with sticks that were wider in radius than their thumbs?  Today, it just means “a general rule.”  But when an expression is first making the transition from nasty to generally accepted due to ignorance of the origin, some people can be offended.  In the interest of modesty, I here suggest some expressions that have made the leap during my lifetime without supplying the origins:  “screwed up,” “What’s up, man?”  “Keep your pants on!”

     Ignorance, while not a great excuse, can help mitigate the misuse or misquote of an idiom.  My problem is with people who ought to know better, for instance,  so-called journalists.  And, while I’m admittedly just a little old-fashioned, I still believe teachers ought to have a pretty good handle on the language they are entrusted to teach to others.  And “doggie dog,” while a great name for a canine pet shop or a song in Snoop Dogg’s debut album, should not be used by an educator in place of “dog-eat-dog.”

     Well, this is going to the dogs.  I’m sure I’m driving you up the wall, so I’m going to take the bull by the horns, stick out my neck and guess that you’d like me to get off your back.  Okay, this is the end of the line.

     For those of you who made it to this point, thank you for caring about our means of communication.