Suffixes unto the day
One of the quirkier aspects of word formation in English, as described by Skullturf Q. Beavispants:
[A]fter the original word became common, it got reanalyzed in the popular imagination. “Alcoholic” got reanalyzed as “alco” + “holic”, “hamburger” got reanalyzed as “ham” + “burger”, and “Watergate” got reanalyzed as “Water” + “gate”.
So then people associate the suffix “-holic” with addiction in general, people associate the suffix “-burger” with patties on a bun in general, and people associate the suffix “-gate” with scandal in general, even though doing so isn’t “true” to the etymological history.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that:
And by the way, it would be kind of silly to say that therefore coinages like “chocoholic” are illegitimate or wrong. It would be a little like saying the expression “the algorithm” is wrong because the “al” in “algorithm” historically comes from a definite article, making the “the” redundant.
Or, at the very least, the time to object to “chocoholic” would have been when the word was first being used. Now that it’s caught on, it’s too late.
Then again, cacao kernels get melted down into what is called “chocolate liquor”; it’s only a short step from there to “chocohol.”
Tatyana »
29 October 2008 · 2:31 pm
mmm…chocohol…
Charles Pergiel »
30 October 2008 · 12:31 am
Wonder where I can get me some of that thar chocohol…
McGehee »
30 October 2008 · 10:11 am
I think I could maybe stand to have a shot or two of that workahol.