A young woman from Portland, Oregon, seeks a noun to denote something fake or otherwise dubious. She doesn’t want an obvious swear word, but also doesn’t like the ones she found in the thesaurus. She thinks malarkey, poppycock, and flim-flam sound too old-fashioned and unnatural for a twenty-something to say. Fraud, fake, hoax, janky, don’t sound quite right for her either. The hosts suggest chicanery, sham, rubbish, bogus, or crap. This is part of a complete episode.
You must log in to post a comment.
Deviled Eggs (episode #1554) 09/14/2020:
Some TV commercials launch catchphrases that stick around long after the original ads. The exclamation Good stuff, Maynard! is still a compliment almost 40 years... [more]
Play It by Ear (episode #1553) 08/31/2020: How does social context shape our perception of language? When hiking the Appalachian Trail, a young woman from Wyoming found that fellow hikers assumed she... [more]
Moon Palace (episode #1552) 08/17/2020: What happens in a classroom of refugee and immigrant youngsters learning English? Their fresh approach to language can result in remarkable poetry — some of... [more]
Online Event August 27, 2020: Lemonade, Anyone? 08/04/2020: ... [more]
Cherry Bombs (episode #1551) 07/27/2020: An ornithologist says there's a growing movement to change the name of a pink-footed bird currently called the flesh-footed shearwater. The movement reflects a growing... [more]
I would suggest the work “bunk” (which is a shortened form of “bunkum”). To me, “bunk” sounds about 60-70 years old, while “bunkum” has the ring of 19th century language usage.
A quick follow-up to my recently posted response: a quick check with a standard thesaurus reveals these delicious mouthfuls: “balderdash”, “blather”, “codswallop”, “fiddle-faddle”, “hogwash”, “hokum”, “horsefeathers”, “humbug”, or “piffle”.