Fritinancy

Names in the Wild: Balboa Island

While I was in Southern California last week I made a day trip to Balboa Island, a little piece of paradise by the Pacific. I hadn’t been there since I was a kid, and a lot had changed.

 

 

Sinfulicious sets the bar for “sinful” pretty low: “Over 200 yummy scents to choose from!” On the plus side of the ledger: another -licious name! And they claim to have a mixologist on the premises. (For lotions and potions, not for cocktails.)

The island is full of boutiques that sell resort-y clothing and tchotchkes, like this one.

 

 

So nice they named it twice—or more. Is it Etc. Etc., Etc. Etc. Etc., Etcetera Etc., or Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. (as depicted)? All I can say for sure is that it reminded me of Yul Brynner in The King and I.

 

 

A couple of stores are, literally, frozen in time. The Original Frozen Banana, which has been on the island since 1945, may have been the inspiration for Bluth’s Original Frozen Banana on “Arrested Development.”

As we know, there’s always money in the banana stand.

Close-up of the running-bananas awning:

 

A competitor, Dad’s Original Frozen Banana, coexists just down the street. So much originality!

I liked the window sign.

I recommend the Balboa Bar dipped in chopped almonds.

May Linkfest

The new-to-me verb “to knoll” comes from Knoll, the furniture brand named for founders Florence and Hans Knoll. Mike Pope writes in his Evolving English II blog that knolling refers to “aligning or squaring things (as on a desk), or more broadly, in what might be thought of as arranging things in an uber-anal-retentive way.” Mike’s post includes an “Always Be Knolling” video clip. I am a non-knoller—an anti-knoller, even—but I do like knowing the word and its origin.

*

Pinterest is a dream medium for visual thinkers, but lately I’ve been seeing it used in some distinctly verbal ways. See, for example, Dipika Kohli’s board about naming that includes links to posts about taglines, the naming process, and common naming mistakes. I was especially pleased to discover “How to Name Things,” a thoughtful post on the ribbonfarm blog about naming and numbering. And I love the story about how ribbonfarm got its name.

*

Worry more about creating a strong brand than about concocting a “pure” URL, advises Jay Jurisich of naming agency Zinzin. (Hear, hear!)

*

Monday was “Name Day” in the U.S.: the day the Social Security Administration released its 2011 baby-name data. Read Nancy’s Baby Names and Baby Name Wizard for comprehensive coverage. (Each link goes to the first of several posts about the name data.) Some high/low points: Sophia is the number-one girl’s name for the first time; Tyler, Jayden, Isabella, and Miley are finally falling out of favor; and the girl’s name Harper rose in rank from 118th in 2010 to 54th in 2011. Also from Baby Name Wizard, the best sibling name set ever.

*

The misuse of “whom” only seems like a recent problem. Language Log reminds us that the humorist James Thurber, tongue planted firmly in cheek, addressed the problem in 1929: “Take the common expression, ‘Whom are you, anyways?’ That is of course, strictly speaking, correct – and yet how formal, how stilted!”

*

The University of Minnesota’s James M. Pilcher, who has been studying the origin of the taco for 20 years, tells the Smithsonian magazine that the name for the food item may have originated in the 18th century, in the silver mines of Mexico, where “taco” referred to little charges used to excavate the ore. “Taco” first appeared in print in the U.S. in 1905. Lots more fascinating history in that article, including the story of Taco Bell, named for its founder, Glen Bell. For more taco history, read the recent New York Times article about Gustavo Arellano, author of a new book, Taco USA.

*

The Millions on books with one-word titles: “At their best, one-word titles distill content to its purest essence, which is what all titles strive to do, and then they stick in the mind. Sometimes, of course, they fall flat, and much of the time they’re just lukewarm and vague or, worse, falsely grand.”  (Hat tip: Diana Landau.)

*

On the other hand: One hundred books whose titles start with “The Man Who…”

*

Need to name a beverage? Just add zero.

*

“A company needs a new name and it decides to engage its employees to come up with a new name,” writes guest blogger Mark Prus at DuetsBlog. “What could go wrong?” Plenty.

*

Quick: How many fictitious brands from “The Simpsons” can you name?

*

Bill Gardner of Logo Lounge identifies the most significant logo trends of 2012, and the names he gives the trends are as interesting as the designs. A sampling: Potato Chip, Anaglyphs, Sphere Carving, Peel.

*

Why does the sentence adverb “hopefully” carry a stigma in some quarters while “obviously,” “seriously,” and “honestly” don’t? Linguist Geoff Pullum casts a gimlet eye on “five decades of foolishness,” hopefully put to rest now that the AP Stylebook permits “the modern usage of hopefully”—i.e., “it is hoped that.”

Vote for Fritinancy!

Breaking news—for the fourth consecutive year, this blog has been honored with a nomination in the Lexiophiles Top Language Professional Blog competition.

I’m hoping for another top-10 appearance, but like Miss Velma Kelly in Chicago, I simply cannot do it alone*. I would be very grateful if you (and your Facebook friends, Twitter followers, colleagues, children, and in-laws) voted for me. Here’s how, in one easy step: Click on the badge and select “Fritinancy” in the alphabetical list.

Yes, it’s just that easy!

I cannot tell a lie: The stakes in this contest are low, the financial rewards nonexistent. But my professional honor, and the honor of all name developers, is at stake. Why? Because the list of nominees is packed with translators, whereas Fritinancy represents exactly half of all the naming blogs in the running. (The other nominee is my esteemed colleague The Name Inspector. He’s very good, but my selflessness extends only so far.) Let’s win this one for the namers!

And just look at that handsome set of Lexiophiles badges over in the right rail! Wouldn’t a fourth one create a pleasing symmetry? Of course it would. So vote for Fritinancy!

While you’re on the Lexiophiles site, you may also choose to vote for your favorite Language Learning Blog, Facebook page, and Twitter account. (Yes, once again I neglected to nominate my own Twitter account. Will one of you please take care of that task for me next year?)

You can vote only once in each category, so make it count! Voting closes at midnight (German time) on May 28; results will be published May 31.

I thank you for your support.

__

* That’s right: I am shamelessly sweetening the deal by throwing in some Zeta-Jones T&A (and gams).

On the Visual Thesaurus: Presidential Campaign Lingo

In my latest column for the Visual Thesaurus, published today, I consider some buzzwords and catchphrases of the current U.S. presidential campaign, which is entering the general-election phase. It’s the first of two columns, organized alphabetically, so if you don’t see one of your favorite words or phrases, check back in a week or so. (Update: Here’s Part 2.)

Here’s an excerpt from this week’s installment. 

Forward. The Obama campaign's slogan — “Forward” — made its debut in late April. Pundits immediately parsed it as if it were the Rosetta Stone. Buzzfeed claimed the slogan was borrowed from the left-ish news channel MSNBC (“Lean Forward”); Slate saw a connection with a 2005 slogan used by Britain's Labour Party (“Forward, Not Back”). Other observers pointed to the centrist Israeli political party Kadimah (which means “forward” in Hebrew), to old Soviet slogans, and to the Jewish Daily Forward, which launched in New York in 1897 as a Yiddish-language newspaper and led many fights for social justice. The slogan also revived an old Democrats vs. Republicans joke: “If you want the car to go forward, put it in D; if you want to go backward, put it in R.”

Read the rest of “Campaign Lingo 2012.”

Flashback: Read my 2008 campaign-lingo column for the Visual Thesaurus!

In the Tank

Alliteration—check.

Brevity—check.

Memorability—check.

Appropriateness? Uh…

 

 

I can’t tell you what the owners of Tot Tank, a children’s store on Alameda’s Park Street, were thinking when they named their business. But I can share my own negative associations:

Tank (noun): Slang for jail cell.

Tank (noun): A large container for liquid or gas.

Tank (noun): An armored combat vehicle.

Tank (verb): To plummet; to suffer a sudden decline or failure.

Tank up (verb): To drink to the point of intoxication.

I had one additional association: “Shark Tank,” the ABC reality show in which entrepreneurs ask a panel of investors (“sharks”) for funding. I am a huge fan of this show and strongly recommend it to anyone starting a business or simply interested in how smart businesspeople think. But I wouldn’t want to think about hungry hammerheads when I’m shopping for onesies and bibs.

On the other hand, there’s that guppy-like Tot Tank logo. Maybe—maybe—we’re supposed to imagine the merchandise as colorful bait for babies.

Sorry. That’s not working for me either.

Bonus link: Read my post about the political use of “in the tank.”

Word of the Week: Grasstops

Grasstops: The leadership in a community or organization. First documented in 1992 in a Public Relations Quarterly article, where the word was spelled “grassTOPS” to emphasize the coinage. Usage has increased since 2007, according to a Google Insights graph.

Here’s a recent sighting, in a May 5, 2012, job listing posted by California Right to Know:

Experience and qualifications:

• Minimum 2-5 years experience in grassroots and grasstops organizing …

The Word Spy entry for grasstops provides some historical background:

This term is a play on grassroots, the ordinary people of a community or organization. Since at least 1912 the word “grassroots” has been used mostly in a political context, where it refers to the rank-and-file of the electorate, a political party, or some other political organization. If the grassroots form the base of the political pyramid, the grasstops form the apex, the small group that consists of the elite and powerful members of the body politic.

See also: Astroturfing.

(Thanks to Deborah Gavrin Frangquist for the tip.)

Mean Trees

Is this where Angry Birds build their nests?

 

Seen at Piedmont Grocery, Oakland.

From the Angry Orchard website:

Once upon a time hard cider was the drink of choice. We’ve been making ciders for decades… Now we want to share them with you. Branch out and experience our Angry Orchard.

“Hard” cider has about 5 percent alcohol. According to a press release, Angry Orchards ciders are “artisanal” (of course) and gluten free. The brand was introduced earlier this year in New England, Colorado, Maryland, and New York; last month it made its nationwide debut.

I couldn’t find an explanation for the brand name.* Maybe it takes a testy tree to make the bittersweet apples preferred for hard cider.

* But sharp-eyed reader Arma Virumque could, on the Origins page: “French bittersweet apples from Normandy are specifically selected and grown solely for making cider. ... Unlike other apple varieties, these apples are small and unattractive as table fruit, aggressively sharp and drying, to the point of looking angry.” 

__

Administrative announcement: I’m taking several days off (and mostly offline). Comment publication will be a little slower than usual. See you back here in about a week.

Snacks and Violence, Cont'd

I’ve added a new category to the blog, “Aggression,” to cover what looks to be a mini-trend: overt hostility in snack-food advertising. Last year, you may recall, I reported on the Cheetos “Headbutt Your Mouth’s Face” campaign and on Ruffles’ Double-Fisted Bacon Cheeseburger chips. And now, thanks to the intrepid eaters over at Impulsive Buy (“Putting the ‘ew’ in product reviews”), I’ve learned the brand promise of Blue Ox Jerky: “Our jerky punches gas station jerky IN THE FACE.”

 

Photo enhanced from the original at Impulsive Buy.

Impulsive Buy contributor Adam reports that his sample pack included a bumper sticker:

“I guess they’re not exactly courting the female demographic, huh?” Adam observes.

The Blue Ox Jerky website carries over the theme:

 

“Fanciful woodland pixies” isn’t exactly “fairies,” but the implication is, nonetheless, clear. (Elsewhere, the home page declares that “Real Men Also Use Coupons—Get One on Our Facebook Page.”)

Speaking of fanciful, the website includes a legend—or a shaggy ox story—that rambles on about Paul Bunyan’s brother Saul and his adventures with the Swedish spice traders the Jürke brothers. As you may recall from your American folk history, the giant lumberjack Paul Bunyan had a blue ox named Babe. In the Blue Ox Jerky version, poor Babe gets trapped in a barn fire that brother Saul extinguishes with teriyaki sauce. Babe dies; jerky rises from the ashes.

BOJ products are divided into “Meats” and “Unmeats” (“Because we don’t believe in the word ‘vegetarian’”). A sticker announces that Smoked Tofu Jerky has been discontinued “for being pointless and disgusting.” But I love smoked tofu, you (and I) protest! Tough Bunyans: clicking on “Tofu Discontinued” takes you to a What Would Saul Do? quiz. Answer correctly and you earn your Man Card; slip up and your “Application for Manhood” is denied with a sneer: “Wrong choice, Sally. Try again, and maybe ask your boyfriend this time.”

Ouch.

How does Blue Ox Jerky taste? I defer to Adam at Impulsive Buy. He liked a couple of the flavors:

But judging by some of the beef jerky I’ve had from gas stations, the Blue Ox wouldn’t be able to last more than a few rounds in the ring. Still, it’s better than what you’ll find at the Dollar Store. Maybe they should change their slogan to “Punches Dollar Store Jerky in the Face.”

Or how about this: “We Put the Jerk in Jerky.”

__

Speaking of face punching, head butting, etc., here’s a 2006 Canadian commercial for 7Up that goes beyond threats. Hat tip: Chris Smith.

Word of the Week: Wantologist

Wantologist: A coach who sells his or her assistance to people unclear about what they want. A blend of want and -ologist (“specialist”). Derived from Want-ology, a trademark registered in 2008 to Dr. Kevin B. Kreitman, “cybernetician & Renaissance woman.” (“That’s Kevin—just like the man’s name. And yes, I am female.”)

Here’s how the Want-ology website explains it:

To get what you really want, you have to know what you really want. Feel really secure that your dream job won't trap you in a nightmare. And feel confident that you can avoid jumping “out of the frying pan into the fire” when you decide to go for it.

Want-ology^TM is the fundamental course that will focus you on what you truly want in a way that will enable you to make your dreams come true.

In a new book, The Outsourced Life: Intimate Life in Market Times, sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild examines wantologists and their kin: dating coaches, wedding planners, Rent-a-Grandmas, photo-album assemblers, nameologists (who will name your baby for a fee), and so on. This passage comes from an excerpt published in yesterday’s New York Times Sunday Review:

After a 20-year career as a psychologist, Ms. [Katherine] Ziegler expanded her practice to include executive coaching, life coaching and wantology. Originally intended to help business managers make purchasing decisions, wantology is the brainchild of Kevin Kreitman, an industrial engineer who set up a two-day class to train life coaches to apply this method to individuals in private life. Ms. Ziegler took the course and was promptly certified in the new field.

…

Ms. Ziegler explains that the first step in thinking about a “want,” is to ask your client, “ ‘Are you floating or navigating toward your goal?’ A lot of people float. Then you ask, ‘What do you want to feel like once you have what you want?’ ”

…

Ms. Ziegler provided a service — albeit one with a wacky name — for a fee. Still, the mere existence of a paid wantologist indicates just how far the market has penetrated our intimate lives. Can it be that we are no longer confident to identify even our most ordinary desires without a professional to guide us?

Hochschild wonders whether wantology represents “the tail end of a larger story”:

Consider some recent shifts in language. Care of family and friends is increasingly referred to as “lay care.” The act of meeting a romantic partner at a flesh-and-blood gathering rather than online is disparaged by some dating coaches as “dating in the wild.”

…

The very ease with which we reach for market services may help prevent us from noticing the remarkable degree to which the market has come to dominate our very ideas about what can or should be for sale or rent, and who should be included in the dramatic cast — buyers, branders, sellers — that we imagine as part of our personal life. It may even prevent us from noticing how we devalue what we don’t or can’t buy.

Hochschild is not the only author asking these questions. Michael J. Sandel, a professor of government at Harvard, has just published What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets, which is also about what money can buy—a prison-cell upgrade and the right to emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, to name just two examples. An excerpt from Sandel’s book appeared in the April issue of the Atlantic.

Fuxy lady

I knew about the fashion brand FCUK and the Australian wine brand Suxx. But Fux shoes? How had I managed to miss that one?

 

Listing on eBay.

And then it dawned on (or don don) me: “fux” was someone’s idea of “faux.” And not just one someone: there are more than 44,000 Google matches for “fux leather.”

That’s just fuxed.

By the way, if you spell it “fux leather,” be careful when you write about cologne.