Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 03:53:52 -0700
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From: jwakefield@4dmg.net (john wakefield)
Subject: Affectionate diminutive formation (F?)
Before the Westfalia owners and those finding them interesting are
divided into air and water, let me fire your collected neural cells.
As I understand, the VW Westfalia has it's origins in a sector of
Germany bearing the name Westfalia. In reasonable pride and
understandable hope, when VW elected to export them into the US market,
the Westfalia name was attached to it as a model designation.
At first West jumps out at the uninitiated, and smart advice of a
former age, "Go West young man" and thoughts of how "cool" far-west
California was, give it a fine start as a marketing name. But Westfalia
drags on for too many sylables. Worse, it's easily mispronounced to
phonetically seem to contain the english word fail. By the time you have
to explain that this isn't right, the incorrect association has only been
reinforced, a self defeating process.
I've heard people integrate the word hatchew or similar style into
their noise made in sneezing. It's silly of course, but I imagine a
Japaneese warior attempting to integrate four traditional sylables into
his manly sneeze. It would be a stretch. Four sylables is just too long
for a familiar common reference. Like children so named, the names beg
to be shortened. And here's where the affectionate diminutive comes to
our attention.
Single sylables are potentially too short for good communication. Said
alone and quickly, they can be confusing. By the time someone notices
that you've said something, you've stoped talking and they aren't sure
they know just what you did say. Besides, the concept of sylables is
useful but shouldn't be pressed too far. Phonetically take the names Jay
and Jake. Jake takes about twice as long. Still, they're both one
sylable.
But two sylables make nicely functioning names. Westfalia recognizably
and pleasingly shortens to Westie or should it be Westy? It seems to me
that many of this affectionate diminutive's users and opinion leaders of
others who may use it are right on this list. As Lewis Carrol so well
explained, words mean what we decide they mean, and may I add, are
spelled as we decide they are to be spelled. It's curious that a
spelling disabled person like me should find this interesting, but for
the moment, I do.
I think of my Westfalia to be either neuter or, like a ship, feminine.
And because of that, I've decided I favor Westie over Westy. I know that
as an unusually complex vehicle, it's more subject to having its
component parts need attention. So to engendering the warmest most
positive feelings toward it, should, I think, be a goal. So the one that
is most easily and naturally associated with affectionate and forgiving
feelings, should be adopted. For me, that's Westie rather than Westy,
even though I'm strongly attracted to the apparent efficiencey
improvement in one less letter.
But on balance, I propose that this phonetic affectionate diminutive be
spelled Westie.
Respectfully submitted,
John Wakefield
|