explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2381: The True Name of the Bear

2024-05-29T16:49:12Z

172.71.214.212:

This one is ridiculously early. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.120|172.69.22.120]] 05:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Let’s try this again, hopefully won’t get stepped on this time... I know I’ve seen Gretchen on various YouTube channels but is she really “the world's foremost internet linguist” as Randal claims?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.87|162.158.79.87]] 05:29, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:Probably as a linguist studying internet culture, which she is indeed one of the most famous in that area. Most popular linguist on the internet? It's everyone's guess.
:From Randall Munroe to Tom Scott... how much more proof do you need? Or is it a conspiracy theory waiting to happen? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.143|162.158.74.143]] 16:34, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, after being mentioned by Randall she totally might become the most known one.

"Arth" is Welsh for bear.
:Sounds rather close to the French "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ours#French ours]" (which derives from Latin and whose pronunciation has virtually nothing in common with the English word of the same spelling).--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.29|141.101.69.29]] 15:24, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Hence King Arthur [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.183|162.158.158.183]] 20:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Hmm... I find Ponytail's behaviour strange. At first she asks for explanation/verification of Megan's claim and when she recieves it she yells "NO!" as if she already knew it would be true... [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 09:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:She gets confirmation that the name is lost in panel 3 (and assumes it also confirms the summoning part). So she indeed knew by panel 4.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.66|141.101.68.66]] 10:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:: Why isn't the bear's name summoning it after its name being said out loud in panel 3, though? Or is the name only "true" in English (in which the name didn't exist until Gretchen reconstructed it)? Doesn't make sense. /edit: I know we are talking about myths and superstition here and thus it might be all somewhat hazy but this comic is imho not self-consistent. I'm not used to inconsistent comics on XKCD (unless it's done on purpose for humorous effect which in this case seems not to be true). Thus my irritation. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:13, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:::They are clearly in England (or the Anglosphere in general, though English isn't the official language in the US, merely customary) and by the Rules Of Summoning an English/etc 'bear' ''must'' only respond to the locality-sanctioned word (said with intent, not a coincidentally homophonic collection of syllables, not saying the exact same word but in the sense of being actually quoting a different language that uses the same word).
:::I theorise that the Welsh are saying ''their'' bear-name in slightly the wrong accent for being useful to summon a Welsh bear (maybe it should be more "Ardd"?) due to excessive Anglicisation. Or the Celtic way of not-saying-the-true-Celtic-word is to habitually say the Anglic one, which thus does not count. Or the Welsh bears are just confused by the current trend for dual-language signage and expect/require both. (Welsh then English in one half of the country, English followed by Welsh in the other part of the nation.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 12:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:::If we're worried about consistency here, how is it that all the Romance language speakers (e.g. Orso for Italians, Oso for Spaniards, etc) get away without being constantly mauled? Perhaps it's only the *true* name of the bear, -rkto, that summons the animal. I suppose that would give an explanation of why we don't see any Indo-European speakers around nowadays... [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 13:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:::*NOTE* I've added an explanation that attempts to summarize this consistency discussion. But somebody reverted it. Why? It doesn't seem out of line, compared to a lot of what I read on explainxkcd. [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 14:29, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

:: It need not be so complicated. Perhaps there is only 1 ur-bear (ha ha) that can teleport when it hears the magic word. If the magic word is said many times every day in Wales, that ur-bear would be exhausted by teleportation and only rarely does saying the name cause it to do so. Whereas in English, the first time in years it has been summoned is in this comic, so of course it comes. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 19:54, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
: Or simply the summoning only works when the true name is said in the currently spoken language (English), not as a foreign word. And consistency on how it works or doesn't work in other languages is really really overthinking, as this comics is not about other languages and says nothing on summoning technicalities.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.66|141.101.68.66]] 00:53, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
:: How does the bear know which language is spoken, though... Besides, I'm not sure if this is overthinking if it's basically the first thought I had regarding this comic. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 12:34, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Fascinating! In Russian, the word for bear is also euphemistic, pronounced as ''medved'', which roughly means "knowledgeable about honey". But until today, I thought that something like "ber" is in fact its true name. Turns out it's not even that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.236|162.158.238.236]] 14:02, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
: Actually, ''medved'' is 'honey-eater', see these two links (in Russian) https://pikabu.ru/story/kto_krayniy_za_medvedem_fenomen_tabu_v_lingvistike_5812897 and https://pikabu.ru/story/kak_rabotaet_istoricheskaya_lingvistika2_v_berloge_yetimologa_5817400 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.183.205|162.158.183.205]] 16:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
::Accurate! [[User:Lettherebedarklight|aoijgpisbHtejsykl7ekderhtsjk6r64os4kys\\\[]jsrtjgdrghtvgwrhtejyku5dli6;78t7l6rk5j4h|||||#Rty-----WWWWWWfflfllfllfllfeogk0q9wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww4-cv;c;;c;c[;]z\]d;v[\]????????OH GOD IT'S CRASIHNG MY PC��]] ([[User talk:Lettherebedarklight|talk]]) 06:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
::: Being Russian, I van tell that "med" part means honey, but "ved" part is arhaic word for "know" (compare to "vedma" - witch - "woman, who knows things"). And ''medved'' is a next generation of euphemism - in old slavic bear's name was "ber" (Russian "berloga" - bear's lair) and it is now considered "true name".
:::: Roughly, the 'honey-eater' etymology has the 'v' originating from "medu" being an u-stem and probably "ed" 'eating' lacking the prothetic 'j'. This wouldn't be possible in newer words and is counter-intuitive to modern speakers of most/all Slavic languages, it should shows how old is the word formation. Not sure about the detailed arguments for this etymology, but [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/medv%C4%9Bd%D1%8C wiktionary] has some good links. Even as a folk-etymology 'knowledgeable about honey' shows a more spiritual than fearful relation to bears, but the line can be thin. "berloga" and cognates on the other hand seem to be pretty unclear.
::::Interestingly enough, while all slavic languages have a variation of "medved" as the name for bears, ukrainian is the only one that turns the words around to turn it into "vedmidʹ" (it could also be regular phonetic mutation, toough); Baltic languages seem to use unrelated words (between them and to the rest of Indo-Euripean languages), while on the Indo-Aryan side of things, Persian languages go the "urs" route (although with a strange pronunciation), while Indian languages seemingly go down the bear route, with the word in all of them coming from Sanskrit bhallūkaḥ. I still don't know why Scottish Gaelic uses "mathan", although it meay or may not be related to the "med" in medved.--[[Special:Contributions/172.64.238.164|172.64.238.164]]
:I've just been down a Wikipedia rabbit-hole, because of this information, to try to work out why I don't remember it being reported that Medvedev had resigned and replaced by Mishustin. (Or replaced ''with'' him, wherever he emerged from, ''by'' Putin, to be strictly accurate.). Probably we were more concerned about the Constitutional changes, then 'other things' hit the headlines. Not comic-related, but thank you for enlightening me on both linguistic and (as a side-effect) political subjects. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.26|162.158.158.26]] 16:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

: What were the linguistic speculations that the header mentioned? Even if there's no source, they shouldn't be removed.

I thought the reconstruction was *rtkos, not *rktos? Wikipedia agrees: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h₂ŕ̥tḱos [[Special:Contributions/162.158.183.205|162.158.183.205]] 16:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
: You’re absolutely correct. Not only is the thorn cluster backwards according to the most commonly accepted reconstruction, it also has the wrong velar (should be *k̑, not *k), AND the laryngeal is missing. The syllabicity marker on the *r is also missing, though the nature of the right-to-left syllabification rule means that the *r would at least automatically be syllabified anyway. This was the main thing that really bothered me about this comic, along with the fact that the expected English form would absolutely not be ''**arth'', but ''*urth'' (or perhaps just ''*ur'' (OE ''*urh-'').
: So yes, there’s an awful lot wrong with the actual linguistics in this one. Which is very disappointing. :-( [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.40|162.158.134.40]] 09:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
:: I'm surprised you wrote all that while somehow completely forgetting that these are reconstructions and thus not definitive. Case in point: Etymology online gives both ''*rtko'' https://www.etymonline.com/word/bear and ''*rkto-'' https://www.etymonline.com/word/arctic (apparently it survives in the word 'arctic'. Who knew?) . [[Special:Contributions/172.71.214.212|172.71.214.212]] 16:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I bet a dollar that the long-lost English word for "bear" was "Voldemort". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.242|108.162.215.242]] 01:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

: Oh-oh. You said it. This is why you need to create an account - you don't want people randomly summoning you by your true name "Mr/Ms 108.162.215.242" !! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 17:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC) (Not my real name which is...oh wait...nearly got me there!)

In Finnish bear is karhu, which is also an euphemistic word meaning "the rough one". There are many other words for bear as well, such as kontio (one that walks slowly), nalle ("bear" in Swedish), mesikämmen (the nectar palm), metsän kuningas (the king of the forest), kouko/kouvo (some kind of ghost?), otava (this one would take way too long to explain) and finally oksi/ohto/otso, which likely is the true name. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.239|162.158.238.239]] 11:46, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

A safe name to avoid the name of something dangerous is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noa-name noa-name] [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noa (further reference)]. You find it also for the wolf, devil, god, leprechauns etc. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.215|162.158.154.215]] 20:51, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

The etymological joke might be on the comic writer - hrtkos might be itself a euphemism, cognate with a word in Sanskrit that meant "destroyer" - possibly "hive destroyer."
"''there is also a suggestion that the original PIE word for bear, *rkso- (or its variants) is itself descriptive, meaning "destroyer (perhaps of beehives)", because a cognate word in Sanskrit is "rakshas", meaning "harm, injury''""
Who really knows? Same source identifies the name in Lithuanian as a different euphemism - "the shaggy one." And wonders about a German, a Slav, and a Balt arguing about the best circumlocution while being careful not to slip up and make themselves an xkcd punchline. Anyway, it's a fun read: [https://charlierussellbears.com/LinguisticArchaeology.html] [[User:Jd2718|Jd2718]] ([[User talk:Jd2718|talk]]) 22:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I wonder if the fact that the brown bear (aka grizzly) has been disappearing from most of North-America as the Germanic languages expanded there, could be cited as (weak) evidence that the euphemism actually prevents bears from appearing.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 13:12, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

This has mainly to do with what's called taboo in linguistics and often doesn't only mean the use of an euphemism for a word, but also the complete disappearance of any reletad worlds, or in some cases even worlds that sound vaguely similar. A commonly reported modern example is the presence of at least ten different terms to refer to the restroom in english, where there isn't really (as far as I know) a fear of summoning anything. On the other hand magical thinking was probably more common and bears where a real treath. The commonly given explanation for this phenomenon is inevitably simplicistic, and arguably less funny as it could be a comparable explanation about toilets. I find the slavic euphemism more funny, but germanic languages are considered the kentum languages most close to satem ones and the significance of this distinction is somewhat disputed, so this may actually have a great importance (I really hope some day the same could be said about water closets).

It's worth mentioning that this is the same joke as the "Wake up sheeple!" one.

In David Anthony - The Horse The Wheel and Language (2007) page 24 it's mentioned that speakers of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) language probably avoided speaking the name of the bear for ritual reasons

Some links marked with the padlock symbol have a hovertext saying, "Warning: TV Tropes. See comic 609." I've seen this in other pages here. It's not clear to me what our reaction is supposed to be to these. Is it telling us that the link is unsafe to click on? (If that were meant, why not just remove the link?) Or is it telling us to click on the link to see what the warning actually is? [[User:Koro Neil|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil|talk]]) 03:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
:It is meant to warn that you might get stuck in a wiki walk and be distracted, if I remember correctly. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.211|172.70.130.211]] 17:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2381: The True Name of the Bear

2024-05-29T16:48:12Z

172.71.214.212:

This one is ridiculously early. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.120|172.69.22.120]] 05:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Let’s try this again, hopefully won’t get stepped on this time... I know I’ve seen Gretchen on various YouTube channels but is she really “the world's foremost internet linguist” as Randal claims?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.87|162.158.79.87]] 05:29, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:Probably as a linguist studying internet culture, which she is indeed one of the most famous in that area. Most popular linguist on the internet? It's everyone's guess.
:From Randall Munroe to Tom Scott... how much more proof do you need? Or is it a conspiracy theory waiting to happen? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.143|162.158.74.143]] 16:34, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, after being mentioned by Randall she totally might become the most known one.

"Arth" is Welsh for bear.
:Sounds rather close to the French "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ours#French ours]" (which derives from Latin and whose pronunciation has virtually nothing in common with the English word of the same spelling).--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.29|141.101.69.29]] 15:24, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Hence King Arthur [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.183|162.158.158.183]] 20:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Hmm... I find Ponytail's behaviour strange. At first she asks for explanation/verification of Megan's claim and when she recieves it she yells "NO!" as if she already knew it would be true... [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 09:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:She gets confirmation that the name is lost in panel 3 (and assumes it also confirms the summoning part). So she indeed knew by panel 4.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.66|141.101.68.66]] 10:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:: Why isn't the bear's name summoning it after its name being said out loud in panel 3, though? Or is the name only "true" in English (in which the name didn't exist until Gretchen reconstructed it)? Doesn't make sense. /edit: I know we are talking about myths and superstition here and thus it might be all somewhat hazy but this comic is imho not self-consistent. I'm not used to inconsistent comics on XKCD (unless it's done on purpose for humorous effect which in this case seems not to be true). Thus my irritation. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:13, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:::They are clearly in England (or the Anglosphere in general, though English isn't the official language in the US, merely customary) and by the Rules Of Summoning an English/etc 'bear' ''must'' only respond to the locality-sanctioned word (said with intent, not a coincidentally homophonic collection of syllables, not saying the exact same word but in the sense of being actually quoting a different language that uses the same word).
:::I theorise that the Welsh are saying ''their'' bear-name in slightly the wrong accent for being useful to summon a Welsh bear (maybe it should be more "Ardd"?) due to excessive Anglicisation. Or the Celtic way of not-saying-the-true-Celtic-word is to habitually say the Anglic one, which thus does not count. Or the Welsh bears are just confused by the current trend for dual-language signage and expect/require both. (Welsh then English in one half of the country, English followed by Welsh in the other part of the nation.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 12:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:::If we're worried about consistency here, how is it that all the Romance language speakers (e.g. Orso for Italians, Oso for Spaniards, etc) get away without being constantly mauled? Perhaps it's only the *true* name of the bear, -rkto, that summons the animal. I suppose that would give an explanation of why we don't see any Indo-European speakers around nowadays... [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 13:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
:::*NOTE* I've added an explanation that attempts to summarize this consistency discussion. But somebody reverted it. Why? It doesn't seem out of line, compared to a lot of what I read on explainxkcd. [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 14:29, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

:: It need not be so complicated. Perhaps there is only 1 ur-bear (ha ha) that can teleport when it hears the magic word. If the magic word is said many times every day in Wales, that ur-bear would be exhausted by teleportation and only rarely does saying the name cause it to do so. Whereas in English, the first time in years it has been summoned is in this comic, so of course it comes. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 19:54, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
: Or simply the summoning only works when the true name is said in the currently spoken language (English), not as a foreign word. And consistency on how it works or doesn't work in other languages is really really overthinking, as this comics is not about other languages and says nothing on summoning technicalities.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.66|141.101.68.66]] 00:53, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
:: How does the bear know which language is spoken, though... Besides, I'm not sure if this is overthinking if it's basically the first thought I had regarding this comic. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 12:34, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Fascinating! In Russian, the word for bear is also euphemistic, pronounced as ''medved'', which roughly means "knowledgeable about honey". But until today, I thought that something like "ber" is in fact its true name. Turns out it's not even that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.236|162.158.238.236]] 14:02, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
: Actually, ''medved'' is 'honey-eater', see these two links (in Russian) https://pikabu.ru/story/kto_krayniy_za_medvedem_fenomen_tabu_v_lingvistike_5812897 and https://pikabu.ru/story/kak_rabotaet_istoricheskaya_lingvistika2_v_berloge_yetimologa_5817400 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.183.205|162.158.183.205]] 16:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
::Accurate! [[User:Lettherebedarklight|aoijgpisbHtejsykl7ekderhtsjk6r64os4kys\\\[]jsrtjgdrghtvgwrhtejyku5dli6;78t7l6rk5j4h|||||#Rty-----WWWWWWfflfllfllfllfeogk0q9wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww4-cv;c;;c;c[;]z\]d;v[\]????????OH GOD IT'S CRASIHNG MY PC��]] ([[User talk:Lettherebedarklight|talk]]) 06:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
::: Being Russian, I van tell that "med" part means honey, but "ved" part is arhaic word for "know" (compare to "vedma" - witch - "woman, who knows things"). And ''medved'' is a next generation of euphemism - in old slavic bear's name was "ber" (Russian "berloga" - bear's lair) and it is now considered "true name".
:::: Roughly, the 'honey-eater' etymology has the 'v' originating from "medu" being an u-stem and probably "ed" 'eating' lacking the prothetic 'j'. This wouldn't be possible in newer words and is counter-intuitive to modern speakers of most/all Slavic languages, it should shows how old is the word formation. Not sure about the detailed arguments for this etymology, but [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/medv%C4%9Bd%D1%8C wiktionary] has some good links. Even as a folk-etymology 'knowledgeable about honey' shows a more spiritual than fearful relation to bears, but the line can be thin. "berloga" and cognates on the other hand seem to be pretty unclear.
::::Interestingly enough, while all slavic languages have a variation of "medved" as the name for bears, ukrainian is the only one that turns the words around to turn it into "vedmidʹ" (it could also be regular phonetic mutation, toough); Baltic languages seem to use unrelated words (between them and to the rest of Indo-Euripean languages), while on the Indo-Aryan side of things, Persian languages go the "urs" route (although with a strange pronunciation), while Indian languages seemingly go down the bear route, with the word in all of them coming from Sanskrit bhallūkaḥ. I still don't know why Scottish Gaelic uses "mathan", although it meay or may not be related to the "med" in medved.--[[Special:Contributions/172.64.238.164|172.64.238.164]]
:I've just been down a Wikipedia rabbit-hole, because of this information, to try to work out why I don't remember it being reported that Medvedev had resigned and replaced by Mishustin. (Or replaced ''with'' him, wherever he emerged from, ''by'' Putin, to be strictly accurate.). Probably we were more concerned about the Constitutional changes, then 'other things' hit the headlines. Not comic-related, but thank you for enlightening me on both linguistic and (as a side-effect) political subjects. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.26|162.158.158.26]] 16:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

: What were the linguistic speculations that the header mentioned? Even if there's no source, they shouldn't be removed.

I thought the reconstruction was *rtkos, not *rktos? Wikipedia agrees: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h₂ŕ̥tḱos [[Special:Contributions/162.158.183.205|162.158.183.205]] 16:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
: You’re absolutely correct. Not only is the thorn cluster backwards according to the most commonly accepted reconstruction, it also has the wrong velar (should be *k̑, not *k), AND the laryngeal is missing. The syllabicity marker on the *r is also missing, though the nature of the right-to-left syllabification rule means that the *r would at least automatically be syllabified anyway. This was the main thing that really bothered me about this comic, along with the fact that the expected English form would absolutely not be ''**arth'', but ''*urth'' (or perhaps just ''*ur'' (OE ''*urh-'').
: So yes, there’s an awful lot wrong with the actual linguistics in this one. Which is very disappointing. :-( [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.40|162.158.134.40]] 09:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
:: I'm surprised you wrote all that while somehow completely forgetting that these are reconstructions and thus not definitive. Case in point: Etymology online gives both ''*rtko'' https://www.etymonline.com/word/bear and ''*rkto-'' https://www.etymonline.com/word/arctic . [[Special:Contributions/172.71.214.212|172.71.214.212]] 16:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I bet a dollar that the long-lost English word for "bear" was "Voldemort". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.242|108.162.215.242]] 01:03, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

: Oh-oh. You said it. This is why you need to create an account - you don't want people randomly summoning you by your true name "Mr/Ms 108.162.215.242" !! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 17:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC) (Not my real name which is...oh wait...nearly got me there!)

In Finnish bear is karhu, which is also an euphemistic word meaning "the rough one". There are many other words for bear as well, such as kontio (one that walks slowly), nalle ("bear" in Swedish), mesikämmen (the nectar palm), metsän kuningas (the king of the forest), kouko/kouvo (some kind of ghost?), otava (this one would take way too long to explain) and finally oksi/ohto/otso, which likely is the true name. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.239|162.158.238.239]] 11:46, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

A safe name to avoid the name of something dangerous is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noa-name noa-name] [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noa (further reference)]. You find it also for the wolf, devil, god, leprechauns etc. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.215|162.158.154.215]] 20:51, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

The etymological joke might be on the comic writer - hrtkos might be itself a euphemism, cognate with a word in Sanskrit that meant "destroyer" - possibly "hive destroyer."
"''there is also a suggestion that the original PIE word for bear, *rkso- (or its variants) is itself descriptive, meaning "destroyer (perhaps of beehives)", because a cognate word in Sanskrit is "rakshas", meaning "harm, injury''""
Who really knows? Same source identifies the name in Lithuanian as a different euphemism - "the shaggy one." And wonders about a German, a Slav, and a Balt arguing about the best circumlocution while being careful not to slip up and make themselves an xkcd punchline. Anyway, it's a fun read: [https://charlierussellbears.com/LinguisticArchaeology.html] [[User:Jd2718|Jd2718]] ([[User talk:Jd2718|talk]]) 22:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I wonder if the fact that the brown bear (aka grizzly) has been disappearing from most of North-America as the Germanic languages expanded there, could be cited as (weak) evidence that the euphemism actually prevents bears from appearing.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 13:12, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

This has mainly to do with what's called taboo in linguistics and often doesn't only mean the use of an euphemism for a word, but also the complete disappearance of any reletad worlds, or in some cases even worlds that sound vaguely similar. A commonly reported modern example is the presence of at least ten different terms to refer to the restroom in english, where there isn't really (as far as I know) a fear of summoning anything. On the other hand magical thinking was probably more common and bears where a real treath. The commonly given explanation for this phenomenon is inevitably simplicistic, and arguably less funny as it could be a comparable explanation about toilets. I find the slavic euphemism more funny, but germanic languages are considered the kentum languages most close to satem ones and the significance of this distinction is somewhat disputed, so this may actually have a great importance (I really hope some day the same could be said about water closets).

It's worth mentioning that this is the same joke as the "Wake up sheeple!" one.

In David Anthony - The Horse The Wheel and Language (2007) page 24 it's mentioned that speakers of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) language probably avoided speaking the name of the bear for ritual reasons

Some links marked with the padlock symbol have a hovertext saying, "Warning: TV Tropes. See comic 609." I've seen this in other pages here. It's not clear to me what our reaction is supposed to be to these. Is it telling us that the link is unsafe to click on? (If that were meant, why not just remove the link?) Or is it telling us to click on the link to see what the warning actually is? [[User:Koro Neil|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil|talk]]) 03:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
:It is meant to warn that you might get stuck in a wiki walk and be distracted, if I remember correctly. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.211|172.70.130.211]] 17:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

2420: Appliances

2024-02-28T08:27:29Z

172.71.214.212: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2420
| date = February 3, 2021
| title = Appliances
| image = appliances.png
| titletext = If you had an oven bag and a dryer that runs unusually hot, I guess you could in theory make tumbled eggs.
}}

==Explanation==

This comic shows a {{w|confusion matrix}} of the applicability of various household appliances to different tasks. Green indicates an excellent performance, yellow not ideal, but usable, and red dismal or destroyed. The diagonal is green as it shows the tasks done by the machines they are supposed to be performed by. See [[#Table|table]] below. The comic is similar to [[1890: What to Bring]] and [[2813: What To Do]], but those comics do not use yellow or another intermediate color.

Salmon can be easily {{w|Dishwasher salmon|cooked in a dishwasher}}, so it's marked "cooked", and thus "cook a frozen dinner" is only yellow on the dishwasher entry (and that's if plain salmon fillets are even part of the meal; what little fish commercially-prepared frozen dinners are built around (instead of being part of a recipe, as with tuna casserole) tends to be breaded white fish such as cod, mackarel, smelt, etc. for price and logistical reasons (retaining taste & firmness through the cooking, freezing, thawing & reheating processes)).

The stove/oven has three green as it can also cook a microwave frozen dinner, although slower, and can toast bread, again slower than the toaster. It is by far the machine that has the fewest red entries, only one, as it cannot wash clothes. It can also not clean dishes, but it might sterilize them, thus that entry is yellow. It may actually dry the clothes, but is liable to burn them and is therefore yellow.

The microwave oven can also cook eggs, thus it has two green, the only other than the stove/oven with more than one green.

The toaster and the washing machines are the only ones without any yellow, and with only one green, for making toast/washing clothes - they are thus the appliances with the fewest other potential uses (zero). The washing machine will at least not destroy the clothes if you try to dry them, but it has the opposite effect, thus still red. The toaster will not destroy the dishes, but will potentially just make the dirt burn harder.

The title text mentions that it would be theoretically possible to cook eggs in a dryer, but it is not a common use for a dryer.{{Citation needed}} The joke is that it is not called {{w|scrambled eggs}} but tumbled eggs. It also mentions that the dryer has to become hotter than usual for a dryer (maybe dangerously hot for the clothes for it to work). And then the eggs should be cracked and put in an oven bag, that really needs to be tight and well zipped.

==Table==
{| class="wikitable"
!
! scope="col"| {{w|Toaster}}
! scope="col"| {{w|Dishwasher}}
! scope="col"| {{w|Microwave oven|Microwave}}
! scope="col"| {{w|Washing machine}}
! scope="col"| {{w|Kitchen stove|Stove/oven}}
! scope="col"| {{w|Clothes dryer|Dryer}}
|-
! scope="row"| Make toast
| Yes, a toaster's function is to make toast from bread.{{citation needed}}
| No. A dishwasher would likely turn bread into mush, and the result is unlikely to be edible.
| No. A microwave could heat up bread, but would not brown the bread and make it crunchy. In this image, it appears that the bread is getting unevenly burnt.
| No. A washing machine would break the bread into several pieces and is unlikely to be edible.
| Yes, toast can be made using a stove or an oven.
| No. A dryer would burn the bread due to its heat and would break it up into crumbs due to its tumbling.
|-
! scope="row"| Wash dishes
| No. A toaster would not be able to wash dishes and is likely to do nothing to make them clean (again, other than sterilization by heat).
| Yes, a dishwasher's function is to wash dishes.
| No. A microwave could heat up the dishes, but this would not serve any function in getting them clean and could cause food to get even more stuck on the dishes.
| No. A washing machine would break the dishes. The pieces would be clean, but unusable as dishes unless more robust than regular crockery.
| Maybe, a stove or an oven could theoretically sterilize dishes with high heat (but this would not clean off any stains or stuck food particles).
| No. Worse than the washing machine, the tumbling of a dryer would thoroughly pulverize porcelain dishes.
|-
! scope="row"| Cook a {{w|TV dinner|frozen dinner}}
| No. A traditional toaster would not be able to cook a frozen dinner. A {{w|toaster oven}} combination would be able to do so (see stove/oven).
| Maybe. The fish could be cooked in a dishwasher, however, the rest might not, but this is not a typical use of a dishwasher.
| Yes, a microwave is normally used to cook a frozen dinner.
| No. A washing machine would make the dinner soggy and inedible.
| Yes, a stove or an oven could also be used to cook a frozen dinner. The image shows the dinner being removed from its packaging and placed in a baking pan.
| No. A dryer would make the frozen dinner inedible due to its tumbling action.
|-
! scope="row"| Wash clothes
| No. A toaster would not be able to wash clothes and would instead leave burn marks.
| Maybe. A dishwasher would be able to get the clothes wet but the washing may be uneven.
| No. A microwave would just burn the clothes and not do any washing.
| Yes, a washing machine's function is to wash clothes.
| No, a stove or an oven would burn the clothes and not do any cleaning.
| Maybe. A dryer would heat the clothes and kill germs, but not get any stains out.
|-
! scope="row"| Cook eggs
| No. A toaster would not be able to cook eggs. This image seems to show that eggs were cracked directly into the toaster, which causes a large plume of smoke.
| No. A dishwasher generally cannot cook eggs. However, it does seem that [https://spoonuniversity.com/how-to/5-foods-cook-dishwasher this is plausible to do].
| Yes. A microwave could be used to cook eggs, {{w|poached egg|poached style}} as shown in the image, or also {{w|scrambled eggs|scrambled}}.
| No, a washing machine would destroy the eggs.
| Yes, a stove or an oven is typically used to cook eggs (and other foods).
| No. A dryer would overheat the eggs and tumble them to shreds.
|-
! scope="row"| Dry clothes
| No. A toaster would not be able to dry clothes and would instead leave burn marks.
| No. A dishwasher would be able to get the clothes wet but would not do any drying.
| Maybe. A microwave could (unevenly) get clothes dry.
| No, a washing machine's function is to wash clothes and would just get the clothes wet. A washing machine's spin cycle could dry clothes to some extent but is not intended to fully wring all the water out of clothes.
| Maybe, a stove or an oven could be used to get clothes dry but runs a high risk of burning them, especially on parts that are in contact with metal.
| Yes, a dryer's function is to dry clothes after they are washed.
|}

==Transcript==

:[The comic is laid out like a grid, with usages for common household appliances the left-hand side (Make toast / Wash dishes / Cook a frozen dinner / Wash clothes / Cook eggs / Dry clothes) and appliances for these activities across the top (Toaster / Dishwasher / Microwave / Washing machine / Stove/oven / Dryer). The grid illustrates the "match-ups", with a green square denoting a "correct" match-up, a yellow square denoting something that may work somewhat, and a red square denoting something that most certainly won't work.]

:[From the top left corner, going from left to right, top to bottom, with each first item being on its own line in the grid, the images in the squares are as follows:]

*'''Make toast''' with a '''Toaster''': Green square, toasted toast with stripe pattern.
*'''Make toast''' with a '''Dishwasher''': Red square, slightly broken soggy toast in a puddle of water.
*'''Make toast''' with a '''Microwave''': Red square, non-toasted and unevenly burnt toast.
*'''Make toast''' with a '''Washing machine''': Red square, a few small soggy pieces of toast in a puddle of water.
*'''Make toast''' with a '''Stove/oven''': Green square, toasted toast with somewhat irregular pattern.
*'''Make toast''' with a '''Dryer''': Red square, large pile of breadcrumbs.
*'''Wash dishes''' with a '''Toaster''': Red square, intact glass, somewhat bent fork, and slightly cracked and sooty plate.
*'''Wash dishes''' with a '''Dishwasher''': Green square, clean glass, fork, and plate.
*'''Wash dishes''' with a '''Microwave''': Red square, slightly broken glass, intact fork, and sooty plate.
*'''Wash dishes''' with a '''Washing machine''': Red square, broken glass, intact fork, broken plate.
*'''Wash dishes''' with a '''Stove/oven''': Yellow square, Text reading "Sterilized, at least" with an arrow beneath it pointing at a slightly cracked glass, intact fork, and sooty and cracked plate.
*'''Wash dishes''' with a '''Dryer''': Red square, a large pile of broken porcelain and glass with part of a fork sticking out of it.
*'''Cook a frozen dinner''' with a '''Toaster''': Red square, badly burnt food box emitting smoke.
*'''Cook a frozen dinner''' with a '''Dishwasher''': Yellow square, Text reading "Fish might be cooked" with an arrow beneath it pointing at a food box two-thirds filled with water.
*'''Cook a frozen dinner''' with a '''Microwave''': Green square, cooked food box.
*'''Cook a frozen dinner''' with a '''Washing machine''': Red square, crumpled food box two-thirds filled with water.
*'''Cook a frozen dinner''' with a '''Stove/oven''': Green square, sideways view of steaming cooked food box with lid removed.
*'''Cook a frozen dinner''' with a '''Dryer''': Red square, open crumpled food box with burnt edges. Burnt food stuck to the panel's borders.
*'''Wash clothes''' with a '''Toaster''': Red square, smoking T-shirt with large stripe-shaped burns and flames rising from the top.
*'''Wash clothes''' with a '''Dishwasher''': Yellow square, unevenly wet/washed shirt.
*'''Wash clothes''' with a '''Microwave''': Red square, slightly smoking shirt with spread-out burns and some flame on one sleeve.
*'''Wash clothes''' with a '''Washing machine''': Green square, clean wet shirt.
*'''Wash clothes''' with a '''Stove/oven''': Red square, shirt with a large semi-burned area.
*'''Wash clothes''' with a '''Dryer''': Yellow square, slightly dirty-looking shirt.
*'''Cook eggs''' with a '''Toaster''': Red square, toaster emitting a huge cloud of dense smoke.
*'''Cook eggs''' with a '''Dishwasher''': Red square, slightly cracked eggs in a puddle of some kind.
*'''Cook eggs''' with a '''Microwave''': Green square, egg in egg cup with text "(Poached)" beneath.
*'''Cook eggs''' with a '''Washing machine''': Red square, eggshell fragments in a puddle, presumably the egg.
*'''Cook eggs''' with a '''Stove/oven''': Green square, fried egg with beans on a plate.
*'''Cook eggs''' with a '''Dryer''': Red square, a pile of eggshell dust, and possibly scrambled eggs.
*'''Dry clothes''' with a '''Toaster''': Red square, mostly wet shirt, with parts in the middle being somewhat dry. Smaller stripe-shaped burns.
*'''Dry clothes''' with a '''Dishwasher''': Red square, entirely wet shirt.
*'''Dry clothes''' with a '''Microwave''': Yellow square, dry shirt with smaller burns.
*'''Dry clothes''' with a '''Washing machine''': Red square, wet shirt.
*'''Dry clothes''' with a '''Stove/oven''': Yellow square, dry shirt with small burn-like patches.
*'''Dry clothes''' with a '''Dryer''': Green square, dry shirt.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Food]]