Judge John Hodgman - Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines

Episode Date: July 12, 2023

It's time to clear the docket! This week, it's officially Summertime Funtime in the Court of Judge John Hodgman! Judge Hodgman is back in Maine at the solar-powered studios of WERU with Joel Mann. Summertime Funtime Guest Bailiff Monte Belmonte (New England Public Media) is sitting in for Jesse Thorn. And, we've got word and grammar disputes to discuss with Merriam-Webster's own Emily Brewster. Can you dance with the person what brought you? Is saying UPMOST the UTMOST in wrongness? And what sound do French dogs make? Listen for the answers to these questions and more! 

Welcome to the Judge John Hodgman podcast. I'm your summertime fun time guest bailiff Monty Belmonte, and we are in chambers this week to clear the docket. In the summertime when the weather is cold and the fog won't go away and you're feeling very old. It's the summertime here at W.E.R.U. in Maine. How'd I do, Joel? Pretty good. Who did that song? Joe Bird in the Field Hippies? No. who did that song joe bird in the field hippies

no who is that mungo jerry mungo jerry of course mungo jerry not only not only did i channel a weirdly named artist but of course joel mann had that name on the tip of his tongue here at w-e-r. And over there through my screen is my friend, Monty Belmonte, your summertime fun time guest bailiff in the studios of New England Public Media there in the Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts. How are you, Monty? I'm doing really well. Thank you.

Glad to be back with you. It is the summer now. It is really the summer. Yeah. I'm in Maine. Joel is across the board from me. You are there in your still new digs at New England Public Media. For those who don't know, Monty has moved on from WRSI The River, still a great radio station.

Yes, indeed. No longer has to get up at 2 o'clock in the morning every morning. And instead does a wonderful afternoon daily show on New England Public Media called, say it again, The Notorious 413. The Fabulous 413. The Fabulous 413. The Fantabulous. The Grandiloquent 413.

I love these. It's all of 413, of course, being the area code there. And, Joel, it's just such a thrill to be here with you at WERU. We're going to be recording a lot because, well, I mean, I don't want to get ahead of ourselves, but we're going to, Jesse Thorne and I are going to go on tour this fall. So we're going to be banking a lot of episodes up here at WERU. But because we have a special guest today, also from the New England area, I'm going to chat with you a little later on, Joel, because we don't have a lot of time to chat. Sounds good. Only today are we lucky enough to have Emily Brewster back to the show, a longtime friend of the court,

senior editor and lexicographer at Merriam-Webster, and a fellow resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It's Emily. Hi, Emily. How are you? Hello. I'm doing well. How are you? Well, I'm doing really well because you're here. Thank you very much for joining us again. You are still in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, correct? Yes or no? I am. Yes. And are you a Commonwealthian by birth? No. I'm a Pittsburgher by birth. No, I actually know just by childhood time. I'm actually a New Yorker by birth. You've been all over, even in some big cities. You've been all over. You've been in some big cities. You grew up in Pittsburgh.

I've told this story before, but the one time I was in Pittsburgh, or one of two times I was in Pittsburgh, I came out of the hotel to go do a show. And the elevator opened and there were these two bro-y dudes who got out. And one of them said to the other, are you ready to go see Falling Water, dude? Who got out. And one of them said to the other, are you ready to go see Falling Water, dude? Falling Water, of course, being the Frank Lloyd Wright, very famous Frank Lloyd Wright house outside of Pittsburgh. Yeah. So you ready?

Hey, bro, you ready to go see Falling Water? He goes, bro, I was born ready to see Falling Water. Two very bro-y architecture dudes. I kind of love that. But now you live in Western Massachusetts, which is where we first met, and you've been on the show before. For those who don't know, I will say it again, Emily is a

senior editor and lexicographer at the Merriam-Webster Dictionary Company. What is a lexicographer? That's a word that needs defining. Merriam-Webster defines a lexicographer as what, Emily? A person who writes and edits dictionaries. Person who writes and edits dictionaries. And for those of you who don't remember, Emily discovered a new word. That's not exactly how you say it. You realize there was the usage

of a word that was not documented in the dictionary, and that word was slash is? usage of a word that was not documented in the dictionary and that word was slash is uh i mean that's just one it happens all the time it's just it's it is it is a significant part of the job it's just just finding these little these little missing uh these little lacunae in the dictionary things words that have not been covered yet but that are in use but yes uh yeah uh the letter a pronounced uh not the letter not the word uh like uh letter a as in uh as in a very pleased john hodgman welcomed emily to the show would that be the correct usage yeah that's exactly it yes yes so the uh there in that case tells tells your listener that you are not always very pleased, right? Because if it were the very pleased, then you just might be continually pleased, like

just pleased all the time, just going about in a state of great pleasure. An intuitively insightful Emily Brewster concluded that John Hodgman is not always pleased. It's true. But I'm very pleased now because as in the past, Emily is going to help us sort through your language disputes, your grammar disputes, your phrasing disputes, your pronunciation disputes. I'm mispronouncing that. Your usage disputes. You sent in your harsh words about words to the court and we're going to settle them with a special docket today that we are calling, I came up with this today, mandatory sentencing guidelines.

I love it. Yeah, that's good. You like that? Yes. Came up with that today. Man, put that in the dictionary. And Monty, you're going to help us by guest bailiffing, and we're all going to drink cheap beer and sit by a pool. So it's summertime.

Let's go. Let's get through this word docket. Here's something from Allison in New York, New York. My fiance, Zach, uses the word what as a relative pronoun in place of which or that. For example, he'll say, I decided not to go into the store. What was too crowded? Or I'm packing a jacket. What has a hood?

His brother also makes this mistake. I presume it's something they learned growing up. I don't think it's a regionalism. They are ever heard of this, Joel? No. No. I'm packing a jacket. What has a hood? Allison also sent in some evidence in the form of text messages. So this is not just a spoken speech pattern, but Zach uses it in writing as well such as this is allison to zach how about you how was lunch and zach replies lunch was fine fast thank goodness which i totally i totally appreciate yeah and then zach goes on to say it has been fine i was doing so much outreach today what is so exhausting and and later zach says we took some good walks today

i actually had a great day it was pretty low-key what was nice then in a little bit i'll see adam and max uh first of all i just have to i have to i'm completely with zach on this one a fast lunch is good fast lunch is good lunch didn't take too long but as uh as a native of the commonwealth monty and as a resident of the commonwealth uh emily and uh and joel where are you from originally virginia virginia different commonwealth but i live in cape cod for a while there you go has anyone ever heard a person in in the Boston area saying it was pretty low key? What was nice? Or I'm wearing a jacket. What has a hood? Never. Monty?

Never. Unless, but I mean, this doesn't have anything to do with Boston. What if I said like this? I decided not to go into the store what was too crowded. That's what it sounds like to me. Like they're speaking with a cockney accent. It feels a little cockney. Yeah, yeah. It's a little cocked up is what you're saying. I'm familiar with it from a friend from Colorado who says this. Oh, really? Uses this construction sometimes. Colorado.

Well, tell me what you think about this construction. Is it, as Allison says, a mistake? Is it, as Allison says, a mistake? Well, no. So this construction is at least 450 years old and a slightly different version of it with a pronoun as an antecedent instead of a noun phrase. That's 800, like at least 820 years old. So the Dictionary of American Regional English has evidence of this just in the U.S.

I don't even know about what they're doing on the other side of the pond. From Maine to Georgia, Indiana, Texas, Nevada, Hawaii, Emily Dickinson used it in a poem. No, sorry. Actually, it was a letter. She used it in a letter. So that means even more natural speech, even more natural language than something that she has slaved over. So it's definitely dialectal. And it was, you know, apparently in Emily Dickinson's dialect, you know, it's, it's

safely dialectical. It's not standard English, but that doesn't mean it's bad. And of course we do not, uh, we do not believe in prescriptive grammar here on the Judge John Hodgman podcast any more than I imagine the Merriam-Webster Dictionary does. I'm very glad to know that. I mean, I wouldn't be here otherwise. Look, I appreciate it. For example, by prescriptive grammar and usage, we mean to say, this is the correct way to say things. This is the correct way to do it, which is often tied into various sort of mechanisms of class and discrimination. And it's we choose instead a descriptive approach, which is to say,

these are the ways people say things. What is just fine most of the time? For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary refers to a hot dog as a sandwich. I can describe that error and not get upset. Because certainly there is some wiggle room there. I know that we have this difference of opinion vis-a-vis hot dogs and sandwichness, me and the Merriam-Webster dictionary. And yet we can both agree to disagree and be fine with it. There's not a mistake there. In this case, there are really two possibilities. One is that Zach and his brother were raised hearing this kind of a construction. And because

it's such a basic kind of construction, they just assimilated it into their natural speech and have not really considered or until recently apparently until maybe until uh who knows how often zach has been has been confronted about his his unusual speech um yeah they don't they don't know which is wrong with them but what's what's possible is that they learned this from from childhood you know who knows why constructions like this fall out of use, but they are maintained by family groups, really, and by sometimes larger groups also. So it's possible that it's that.

The other option is that this is an affectation that Zach and his brother have decided to adopt. And if they've decided to adopt it, then I think it's reasonable to ask that he stop. But I think it's also really unlikely that it's an affectation. It seems more likely that it's just this quirky element of her ostensibly beloved partner. And it's just a feature of his idiolect. And she can accept it. And ideally, she would find it charming. That's my opinion.

You know, I'm glad you said that because a lot of people know I only ever love ostensibly. I love you. I'm glad you take such a firm stance against affectation, though, Emily Brewster. I agree with you. If this is a put-on, like, imagine a Monty Belmonte doing that terrible Cockney accent all the time. That would be something where an authority

would have to step in and prevent him from doing that affectation. Well, and actually, I didn't mean that you should make him stop doing the affectation if it's an affectation, just that she could ask that reasonably. But, you know, I'm not really clear on the power of the court. So I defer to you on that. What if we mandate that he does use a Cockney accent all the time? What with this strange affectation?

Just go for it. Full ball. What was nice when I spoke like that. I want to know, Allison, why you have not investigated this further. I will say that I am very curious because while it is not standard English, nor is it particularly typical for any of the speechways that I have ever heard in New England. although, of course, Emily, you say there's documented usage in Maine, and obviously it's a big part of Amherst, Massachusetts lingo. That's where Emily Dickinson wrote her poems and letters, what were very good, honestly.

So I am curious if this is a – you say, Allison, that this is not a regionalism, but I would encourage, and indeed I would demand, that you investigate and ask your ostensibly beloved Zach where this is coming from. And not because it's anything particularly wrong, so long as he is understandable and comprehensible to you, but because I want to know. I would like to know. Zach and your brother, you need to take, make account for yourself and why you say what in this way. And if it is affected, I would like to know that too. Where are you cribbing it from? What are you trying to get away with?

Or which are you trying to get away with? Uh, uh, this is the kind of stuff that I'm very curious about. So I will pass judgment insofar as saying, yes, Alison, you may not want to be an insufferable pedant, but it comes naturally to you. And I will not judge Zach for speaking, quote unquote, nonstandard English, particularly if it's just an authentic regionalism that you haven't explored yet. But I am curious to know whether this is an affectation. And if it is, then I agree with Emily Brewster. We can go ahead and ask Zach to knock it off. Knock it off?

Is that what we say? Why did I say off? Yeah. And ask Zach to knock it on, which is how I say knock it off. All right. Let's hear another one. Here's a case from Kimberly in San Marcos, California. My friend Rob and I disagree on what to call events that happen every year.

We agree the first such event should be called the inaugural event. But what comes next? Rob says that the next time the event occurs, that it should be called the first annual event. called the first annual event. I maintain that when the second event occurs, the inaugural event retroactively becomes the first annual. Thus, the second event is the second annual. Who is right?

Well, first of all, this all feels very abstract to me because I don't know what the event is. So, Monty, Emily, Joel, I'm very proud to announce that today is the inaugural reading of this letter. Yes. I will read this letter every year on or about early July. And this is the inaugural reading of it. And so, next time, Emily Brewster, would next year's reading of the letter be the first annual reading of the letter or the second annual reading of the letter? It'd be the second one.

It would be the second annual reading of the letter. Yeah. Here's what's going on syntactically. We have the word event, and it's being modified by two adjectives if we go to first you know, first annual event, second annual event. But both of those adjectives modify the noun event. It's not like first or second doesn't modify annual. It modifies the word event. So the first event, the first annual event, if the event is not the first one, then it can't be called the first one. But let me put this to the test a little bit.

Monty, you do a march, right? Yes, I do. Tell me about the march that you do. It is a ridiculous publicity stunt fundraiser to raise money and awareness for the Food Bank of Western Mass, where I push an empty shopping cart. Yeah, that really is ridiculous. Raising money for the Food Bank. What Mass, where I push an empty shopping cart. Yeah, that really is ridiculous, raising money for the Food Bank. What an ostensibly ridiculous thing to do. The ostensibly ridiculous part is I push a shopping cart 43 miles over the course of two days from Springfield, Massachusetts to Greenfield, Massachusetts.

That's the ridiculous part. The wonderful part is the community coming together to donate lots of money to make sure people have enough to eat. All throughout the whole region, the whole defenestrable 413 yes although i have not gone to berkshire county yet i gotta figure that out okay so when was the first time you did this what was 14 years ago i believe are you answering in the form of a question this is in jeopardy 14 this will be the 14th annual one coming up this november so 14th time i have been doing it this november yeah so i think that makes it 14 years ago you count the first one as the first annual monty's march now i do but I would never have said that back then. I would have said, the first ever

or inaugural? The inaugural. So the second time you did it is the second annual. Yes. Correct? But thus making the first one, the inaugural, the first annual. It's like there was no World War I until there was World War II.

That's a good thing. I guess they needed the sequel. Everything needs a sequel these days. I guess so. But Emily Brewster, so that works, right? That conforms with your understanding and your answer, right, Emily Brewster? It does. Very confusing.

But what about this? Let's say I get married. Well, Joel, your daughter just got married. That's right. About a year ago in Paris, France. Paris, France. Now, that was what I would call your daughter's inaugural marriage. Correct.

Correct. So that was just about a year ago, and maybe exactly a year ago. I don't want to know the date because I do not have a gift for her or you. You'll be disappointed. But the year commemoration of the first year of marriage is the first anniversary in this case. Correct. And the first anniversary gift is what, Joel? Do you know the traditional first anniversary gift? No.

Monty? Emily? Is it paper? Paper. Paper? Yeah. These are them in order. You ready for this? Paper, cotton, leather, linen, wood. And then the sixth anniversary,

hot dog. Seventh anniversary, sandwich, because they're not the same thing. Eighth, Kung Pao Chicken. Oh, by the way, these are the new modern Judge John Hodgman anniversary gifts. Sorry if that wasn't clear to you. Where does money come in? Well, let's see. The eighth is Kung Pao Chicken.

The ninth is a complete set of alf trading cards from put this on shop which are pretty valuable yeah then then the then the the 10th is eggnog and fanta the 11th is eggnog and moxie the 12th is a gallon of scallops 12th wedding anniversary you get a gallon of scallops. And the 13th, and this is very special. The 13th is the Mitsubishi Delica Japanese Adventure Van anniversary. Because Jesse Thorne really likes the Mitsubishi Delica Japanese Adventure Van. And do you know that by this fall, when we go on tour,

it will be the 13th anniversary of this podcast. Wow. So if you're listening and you're coming on to see us on tour this fall, please remember, make sure to bring it a Mitsubishi Delica as a gift. And also it has to be full of it's at ice cream sandwiches. Um, and yeah,

that's what's going on. The fourth, the 15th is a cranky Shetland pony. The 16th is a living room size jellyfish tank. The 16th is a living room-sized jellyfish tank. The 17th is a Canadian pizza franchise. The whole franchise. The whole national franchise. The 18th, you'll like this, Emily, it's a bat house and a bat house.

That is to say, a bat house where bats can live on the side of a house. And also a house that is infested with bats in honor of our bat brothers episode. Plus you get a complimentary dictionary for the smashing of bats. That was the bat control method used. Could there also be a bath house included just to. Yeah. That's just another H a bath house is terrific. Yeah.

And then I think we're now at the, at the 18th anniversary. You get lunch with Richard Kind, the actor Richard Kind. That's your gift, which is actually not very challenging to get. Just call and they'll show up. 19th, you get a Mr. Peanut jump scare. You get scared by someone wearing a Mr. Peanut costume. And that person is Richard Kind. And the 20th anniversary for your daughter when she reaches her 20th anniversary.

I'm sure we'll both be alive to celebrate it. Yeah, you hope. Get separate bedrooms for the bride and groom, finally. They get to sleep in separate rooms. But Emily, what's the difference between a first anniversary and a first annual event, right? Because if the second Monty's March is the second annual, but the year commemoration of a wedding is the first anniversary, I guess what's different is a commemoration versus a repetition of the event, would you say?

Yeah. I mean, an event is a single thing that happens. An anniversary is necessarily, by definition, a repeat, right? It is a marking of something that has already happened. Here's my wish to your daughter, Joel. Okay. I wish that her marriage be a single thing that happens and that there be only one of them that we honor with a gallon of scallops

when the time is right. We all do. Amen. We're going to take a quick break scallops when the time is right. We all do. Amen. We're going to take a quick break to hear from this week's partners. We will be back with Emily Brewster from Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Words, What is Good? Monty Belmonte and Joel Mann and me, John Hodgman, on the Judge John Hodgman podcast in just a moment.

Hello, I'm your Judge John Hodgman on the Judge John Hodgman podcast in just a moment. Hello, I'm your Judge John Hodgman. The Judge John Hodgman podcast is brought to you every week by you, our members, of course. Thank you so much for your support of this podcast and all of your favorite podcasts at MaximumFun.org. And they are all your favorites. If you want to join the many member supporters of this podcast and this network, boy, oh boy, that would be fantastic. Just go to MaximumFun.org slash join. The Judge John Hodgman podcast

is also brought to you this week by our pals over at Made In. Jesse, you've heard of Tom Colicchio, the famous chef, right? Yeah, from the restaurant Kraft. And did you know that most of the dishes at that very same restaurant are made with made-in pots and pans? Really? What's an example?

The braised short ribs, they're made in, made in. The Rohan duck, made in, made in. Riders of Rohan, duck! What about the Heritage Pork Shop? You got it. Made in, made in. Riders of Rohan, Duck. What about the Heritage Pork Shop? You got it. Made in, made in. Made in has been supplying top chefs and restaurants with high-end cookware for years. They make the stuff that chefs need.

Their carbon steel cookware is the best of cast iron, the best of stainless clad. It gets super hot. It's rugged enough for grills or an open flame. One of the most useful pans you can own. And like we said, good enough for real professional chefs, the best professional chefs. Oh, so I have to go all the way down to the restaurant district in restaurant town? Just buy it online. This is professional grade cookware that is available online directly to you, the consumer, at a very reasonable price. Yeah. If you want to take your cooking to the next level, remember what so many great dishes on menus all around the world have in common.

They're made in Made In. Save up to 25% this Memorial Day from the 18th until the 27th. Visit MadeInCookware.com. That's M-A-D-E-I-N cookware.com. The Judge John Hodgman podcast is also brought to you this week by the folks over there at Babbel. Did you know that learning, the experience of learning causes a sound to happen? Let's hear the sound. Yep. That's the sound of you learning a sound to happen. Let's hear the sound. Yep, that's the sound of you learning a new language with Babbel. We're talking about quick 10-minute lessons crafted

by over 200 language experts that can help you start speaking a new language in as little as one, two, three weeks. Let's hear that sound. Babbel's tips and tools are approachable, accessible, rooted in real-life situations, and delivered with conversation-based teaching. So you're ready to practice what you've learned in the real world and you get to hear the sound. It's not just like a game that pretends to teach you a language. It's also not a rigid, weird, hyper-academic chore. It is an actually productive app that actually teaches you while you are actually having a nice time. And you get to hear this sound. Here's a special limited time deal for our listeners right now. Get up to 60% off your Babbel subscription, but only for our listeners

at babbel.com slash Hodgman. Get up to 60% off at babbel.com slash Hodgman spelled B-A-B-B-E-L dot com slash Hodgman. Rules and restrictions apply. I'm Summertime Funtime guest bailiff Monty Belmonte, and we're here with Judge John Hodgman, of course, Joel Mann, and Emily Brewster from Merriam-Webster, our dictionary right down the street from where I am right now in Springfield, Massachusetts. That's right. It's a Springfield joint, isn't it? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary. It is. When I think of Springfield, I, of course, think of the Basketball Hall of Fame, Dr. Seuss, and the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Yeah. Indian motorcycles, Friendly's ice cream, lots of good stuff. Oh, let's not talk about Indian motorcycles. Volleyball too? Oh, no.

Volleyball was Holyoke, right? Volleyball. Holyoke is the birthplace of volleyball. Yeah. They used to sign all of their- Holyoke is the birthplace of volleyball. Yeah. Almost all of their faxes back in the day when I had a morning radio show and I would

get faxes from the city of Holyoke about parking bans. They all said on them, Holyoke, birthplace of volleyball. Maine is the birthplace of the famous sport of plugging up leaks in your basement. Does it get really competitive up there? Yeah, well, it's more person against nature than person against person. It's been very cold and wet here, but we're working on keeping things dry. So what's this next case we got here, Monty? Here's a case from Adam in Verona, Wisconsin.

I have a dispute with my sisters, April and Jessica, about the word since. When someone uses the phrase, X is the best something since Y, I believe the speaker is making a tacit comparison between the two. Yeah. I'm always saying, X is the best something since Y. Right. Go on. I apologize. No, no worries. They believe the speaker is making a tacit comparison between the two. They deem the former to be superior. My sisters say that using

since in that phrase does not suggest comparison between the two endpoints. It's simply defining a time period. I think we need Merriam-Webster to weigh in on the case. Merriam-Webster is the, is it synecdoche? If I were to refer to Emily Brewster as Merriam-Webster, would that be a synecdoche? If I were to refer to Emily Brewster as Merriam-Webster, would that be a synecdoche? I believe so. I'm asking Merriam-Webster. Well, there's actually some overlap in the use of synecdoche and metonymy. But yes, synecdoche is the more precise term.

Oh, I was more in the synecdoche side of things than metonymy? Yes. Beautiful. Merriam-Webster, I have a question for you. Emily, did you understand the question that Adam was posing? Yes. Yes. What do you have to say about it? Well, when we say that, you know, X is the best something since Y, it's very clear that a comparison is being made. So Adam is right about that. But the new item, I think, is either equal to or about equal to or better than. So I think he's wrong about it being clearly superior. So if you were to say, for example, you know, this is the best Judge John Hodgman episode since the last one about language,

it doesn't mean that this one is better than that one. In truth, the phrase really is just good at denigrating everything that's come between. I mean, isn't it marking a point in time to a degree? Like if I say this new upgraded voice over internet protocol telephone line installed in WERU is so clear and so smooth compared to the janky copper wires that were being used in years past. It's the best thing since sliced bread. Now, there is no comparison between VoIP and sliced bread. It just means to say this is the best thing that happened to be invented since sliced bread was invented, no? Yes, but is it saying that it is better than the sliced bread? I don't see, I don't think it is. I agree with you, Emily. I think that it's simply saying, remember how

awesome it was when sliced bread came along and we were so excited? Well, guess what? I'm excited about something new and it's happening now and it's called VoIP. But Adam's dispute makes it seem like the former is superior, meaning that sliced bread is better than anything to be compared with. I'm simply quoting. Alright, let's unpack this sentence one more time. A dispute with April and Jessica. When someone

uses the phrase, X is the best something since Y, I believe the speaker is making a comparison between the two. I took out tacit there. I took out tacit, Adam. Too many words. too many words you need that the speaker deems the former to be superior the latter would be y the former would be x right so that is saying that right so that is saying that voip is better than sliced bread and that i will not say i will not say that that's true if it is sliced bread really good actually well it's true oh no you're right i mean what if you put a hot dog on it i don't want joel man's daughter's former husband is x put a hot dog on a piece of bread why don't you put a

a worm on a hook the way you're trying to bait me into this argument? You started it, for sure. I was not coming here planning to talk about hot dogs at all or sandwiches. No, no, no. I know. We're not talking about it. We're not talking about it. It's terrific.

It's terrific. Hot dogs are great in any form and game. I think there's some complexity to this particular phrase, right? It can either be used to compare things that are alike, like in my example, or things that are very unalike. And I think that the function differs when, depending on whether two things are alike or two things are dramatically different. So you're saying the answer is kind of Adam's a little bit right and April and Jessica are a little bit right. It depends on what we call usage and context.

I think so. Yeah. Because the sliced bread thing really is a celebration of ingenuity. Whether or not you think sliced bread is so hot. And you know what? I'm going to be honest with you, Joel. VoIP is better than sliced bread now that I think about it. It could be sliced sourdough. Yeah, but I mean, when you think about the fact that I'm talking to my friends, Emily and Monty, and they're in Massachusetts, and I'm in a room with you in Maine, and I can see pictures of them crystal clear because of the internet.

Now, we all know that the internet is destroying civilization. But this is still pretty cool. And I'd rather slice my own bread than never get to see Monty Belmonte's smiling face on my teleconferencing program again. Aw, shucks. Here's my ruling.

I'm going to rule in favor of April and Jessica. For the most part, there is a comparison, but it is not necessarily a comparison of value or superiority and i'm going to rule against adam because even as i say that i'm not sure which one of you holds what position because your letter was very confusing to me and i didn't i'm sorry about that and i'm going to say this sliced bread to quote j Horn, hang it up, slice bread. We don't need you.

We need a new gold standard of comparison. I mean, I think that slice bread was a huge innovation for its time and was a big increase in convenience for hardworking parents trying to shove peanut butter and jelly into the grubby hands of their offspring. But I would say this is the best thing since VoIP. Today is the inaugural time that VoIP has become the new gold standard. That's right. Replacing sliced bread. What about, do we have anything from Janice in Toronto, perhaps? We sure do.

Janice writes, I have a dispute with anyone who says something is addicting instead of addictive. I know it is a futile venture to police how people speak and have zero desire to do so. Really? Zero desire? Seems like you're writing me a letter. Sure does. I just want someone to agree with me in truth. So, Janice, I understand. And Paul and Toledo posed a similar question about the distinction between toward and towards, two words that are just a little bit different. And there's some dispute over which, if either of them is quote unquote correct.

And Paul goes on to say, I also am vexed as to how I grew up with utmost when I am now faced with the daily reality of utmost. Oh yeah. I've never heard utmost before in my life. Of the utmost importance, have you ever heard that, Joel? Never. Never, Monty? No.

Emily, maybe we're hearing a neologism. No, no, it's not a neologism. You've heard something being of the utmost importance? Well, I have, but also utmost, before people were kind of making utmost do the job that utmost traditionally does. Upmost is a word meaning uppermost, like you're going to sleep on the utmost bunk tonight. Right. Yes, of course. That's where all only children sleep. All only children have bunk beds and they always sleep on the top bunk. Just to lord it over everybody who has to share their parents' love and also to represent the horrible absence of siblinghood beneath them as they fall into slumber.

Upmost is a word, Paul. Upmost also sounds like something someone would say in an elevator that's stuck, as I once got stuck in an elevator in Toledo. That's the only thing I can think of when I think of Toledo, Paul. I'm sorry. I wish I had better associations with Toledo. I'm sure it's a terrific town. So let's talk about it. Addicting versus addictive versus toward versus towards versus utmost versus

utmost. What do you have to say about these not so classic pairings? Well, I mean, there are three very different cases to my mind. So I think that Janice doesn't have as much to worry about as she thinks she does, because addictive is so far and away more common than the word addicting. But they're both fully established. The word addicting dates to like the 1930s. Addictive is a late 19th century word. And so they're both used, they're both perfectly fine. Even medical professionals will use the word addicting to describe true physical addiction. But addictive is so much more common. Even in kind of informal uses, like, you know, so addictive is more common than so addicting, for example.

is more common than so addicting, for example. So there is anecdotal evidence that addicting is the word that you should choose when it's an inclination that you're indulging. And that addictive is the proper word for the compulsive chronic need. The substance itself automatically has an addictive quality that's how it that's how it scans to my ear that the substance let's say um scallops that you eat by the gallon

full like a scallop is addictive if it means you eat one you're probably going to get addicted to that scallop. Whereas I feel like addicting means it's very tasty and I might develop a behavior of eating more scallops than I should, but there's nothing chemical in the scallops that is causing me to suffer scallop withdrawal when I don't eat a gallon a day. I'm trying to describe Joel who's suffering with this. This is actually an intervention, Joel. Is that a distinction that I am inventing in the moment, or is there anything there, Emily Brewster, would you say? I think that's a distinction that you are not alone in making, but it is not inherent to the word's actual meaning. Either way. Addictive is older than addicting, at least in terms of its citation, printed citation? Okay, all right.

So Janice, take it easy. You know, it tends to be a little bit addicting, correcting people's language. Gives you a real high. Believe me, I know. I'm a recovered prescriptivist. Gives me a little eye to say, no, you're saying it wrong.

Look at me. Look at me polishing a shiny apple on my cardigan in college. Yeah, don't get addicted to correcting other people. What about toward and towards? Are those interchangeable? Yeah, those are also interchangeable. They're both about a thousand years old,

more than a thousand years old, more like 1,200 years old. Wow. Both of them. So not one, I mean, you know, obviously if there was one that was distinctly older than the other, then a pet ant might make an argument like, well, this is the new one because, you know, case A was used in the 1500s and case B didn't come around until the 1600s or whatever. But this is one where they go back pretty much interchangeably for as long as we have

written record, it sounds like. Yes, that's right. And that argument that something is better because it's older is spurious anyway, right? Like that's a garbage argument, right? Like who cares which one's older, which one does the job better. But in this case, they both go back to the very beginning of the English language. And that word, that W-A-R-D, also obviously goes back to the same time period. And there are a whole bunch of other words that also allow both forms. So, you know, forwards,

backwards, forward, backward, inward, outward, inwards, outwards. All of those have been in use for a thousand years. They're just, they're all, they're all out there doing, doing their thing. And some speakers prefer one and some prefer another. It's weird that English allows this or more specifically, it's weird that English in old English times allowed it because back then they had these, you know, the case endings were like a complex part of the English language. Case endings were very important and they changed according to, you know, whether it was an adjective or what case of the sentence it was. And still the language allowed this variation in these words. in these words? I'm going to posit a theory that like backwards was originally backwards, but then they got rid of the S because back then S's were F's and it was hard to say and write

backwards. You know what I mean? I think I'm probably, I think I'm probably correct. Speculative etymology is one of my favorite things to do too. I think I'm right. I think it was because of witches that they got rid of the S. They thought that the S looked like an F, and because of witches in Old English time, they were like, we're going to persecute it. Remove it. But when you talk about Old English, it seems to me like Old English didn't have any rules whatsoever.

Oh, it had way more rules. It really did. I mean, it used to be much more like modern German than it is now. And so it would matter if something was in the accusative case or in the dative case and adjectives and nouns would take endings the way that they do in German. So when did we shed that kind of, that sort of Teutonic self-policing? I mean, it was really before Middle English that that had mostly fallen away because by the time Chaucer was writing, that stuff was kind of, it was like, you know, for the most part gone, which is what made it

possible for English to adopt so many words into it from French, right? It didn't matter. You didn't have to conjugate them. You didn't have to worry about what endings they took. You just threw the word into the language and used it. And that magpie nature of the English language is one of the things that makes it so difficult to learn and yet so fun to use and play around with, I think, personally. All the learn words that we've stolen for that reason. I think it's terrific, is what I would say. I don't know how strongly I feel about it. I do have one more thing to say about toward and towards please and that is that in british english they really like the s they like it so in england you would say towards more often than you might say toward yeah it's untoward to say toward

in england right is what you and why are you saying it why aren't you saying it in your it's untoward to say toward governor what with all the s's that have been milling about oh my god i feel like dick vandykes i'm like a one-man band over here i like how your elbows come into play when you do that accent. I wish you could see that while he's speaking, Monty is holding an imaginary chimney sweep in one hand. And he's walking around with a pair of cymbals between his knees at the same time. You're lucky that it's my elbows, what with it being a cockney accent. Oh, boy.

Though we may agree, finally, that language is what is used, not as what you are instructed to use. Let's instruct Monty no more puns for the rest of the show. Oh, dang it. All right. You have to do it. Do as much as you want, of course. Thank you. So, utmost, of course, means uppermost, as in the bunk bed that we talked about earlier, Emily.

What is the origin of the word utmost? Because I don't see a lot of uts in the English language typically. I do with pretzels. Look, they don't sponsor us. They're never going to come around. I still love, this is the taste of the summer for me. And frankly, this is pretty addicting and addictive utz special dark pretzels dipped in hell of a good onion dip those are my my store my brand name combos for a for a a cold afternoon on a pebbly beach in maine

but emily do you happen to know the etymology of utmost? Yeah, it's again, it traces back to, it dates to old English. The ut was originally an adverb pronounced oot. That meant out. Oh, the outmost. Yeah. Is it the same root of the word utter? Not udder as in a cow, but utter like the utter gall no no it's not this this this particle this word particle does not exist in very many words that are still used i am i found exactly one and um what is it it is well oh no no no wait wait a minute this is a perfect opportunity we'll reveal that after a break incredible incredible tease opportunity when we come back, Emily Brewster will reveal the one other word in the English language that uses the term ut or oot, meaning

out. But first, let's take a little break. Hello, teachers and faculty. This is Janet Varney. I'm here to remind you that listening to my podcast, The JV Club with Janet Varney, is part of the curriculum for the school year. Learning about the teenage years of such guests as Alison Brie, Vicki Peterson, John Hodgman, and so many more is a valuable and enriching experience.

One you have no choice but to embrace because yes, listening is mandatory. The JV Club with Janet Varney is available every Thursday on Maximum Fun or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you. And remember, no running in the halls. And remember, no running in the halls. If you need a laugh and you're on the go, try S-T-O-P-P-O-D-C-A-S-T-I. Hmm. Are you trying to put the name of the podcast there? Yeah, I'm trying to spell it, but it's tricky.

Let me give it a try. Okay. If you need a laugh and you're on the go, call S-T-O-P-P-O-D-C-A-S-T-I. Ah, it'll never fit. No will let me try if you need a laugh and you're on the go try s-t-o-p-p-p-d-c-o-o oh we are so close stop podcasting yourself a podcast from maximumfun.org if you need a laugh then you're on the go. Monty, we're taking a break from clearing the docket, mandatory sentencing guidelines. Let's talk about what we have coming up. I'll tell you, Monty, I mentioned at the top of the show, very, very excited to say that the Judge John Hodgman podcast is going on tour.

And this is a big one. We're going not only around the country more than ever before, dates forthcoming. Watch this space for details. But also over the seas to the London Podcast Festival. We're returning to the London Podcast Festival on Friday, September 15th and Saturday, September 16th. Information and tickets are available now via the MaximumFun.org events page. Just go to MaximumFun.org slash events. We're doing two big shows.

While we're in London for the podcast festival, I can say on some authority that Jesse Thorne will also be there. We'll be doing a live Jordan-Jesse Go during the same festival. It's a wonderful time. We haven't been there since 2017. We cannot wait to go back.

And does that mean we're going to do some more shows overseas? I can't say for sure, but the answer is yes, we will. And we'll be announcing those shows as well as all of our other dates very soon. So as I say, listen to the space for details. And meanwhile, send us your London beefs. You know what they have over there? The beef eaters. You know what I mean? The beef eaters are the ones who wear the hats and make the gin and guard the Tower of London. That's what we are. We need your beefs. We need your beefs to survive. We need your disputes. We need your arguments. We need your fights. We need all of your disputes, particularly if you're living in the London area or can be there during September because we are putting on a show. It's

the one I was just talking to you about. So please send in your London beefs so we can eat them right up at MaximumFun.org slash JJHO. Monty, what's going on with you out there in the Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts? I've got my new radio show. I've jumped ship from my beloved WRSI 93.9 The River and started an afternoon daily, at least Monday through Friday, talk show with my co-host, Khalees Smith, called The Fabulous 413, where we try to talk to as many interesting people about the interesting things that are

happening in the four counties of Western Mass. And it's also a podcast that people can subscribe to wherever podcasts are available, called The Fabulous 413. And listen, I have a question for you. When you're living and loving life there in western Massachusetts, specifically in the area around Turner's Falls, I know that you love to go see a show or host a show

at the Shea Theater, which is a wonderful place to go, but when you get thirsty or want a little snack, where do you slake your thirst or satisfy or sate your hunger i can't tell you how many times after an event at the shea we've crossed the street and shut down my favorite neighborhood bar called the rendezvous the rendezvous in turners falls i've enjoyed many a drink and snack there as well as I did. I've, I've done some shows there and,

uh, and I, I, if it's not clear, I highly recommend it. Emily, what do you think about the rendezvous? Yes or no?

Yes, absolutely. Yes. Yes. Yes. Um, it was completely unbiased opinion, correct?

Completely unbiased opinion. Having been one of the three owners for 15 years now. So yes. Oh, I had no idea. What? And do you have some events at the Rendezvous as well, some live events still? Oh, yes, all the time.

We've got bingo. We've got quiz nights. We've got live music frequently. Where would one go to find out what events are coming up and where the Rendezvous is and how to get there and how to meet up with a friend and truly have a rendezvous there yes uh the voo.net is the website also on instagram and um on the facebook etc that's the voo.net t-h-e-v-o-o.net and you ever have a jazz trio come and play yes Yes. Oh, really? Well, why don't you fire them and hire a different one?

I'm recommending the Night and Day Jazz Trio. Right, Joel? That's right. The Pentagoat every Tuesday, 5 to 8. That's the Pentagoat Inn in Castine, Maine, 5 to 8 p.m. Live jazz on the porch with Joel Mann. The main man, Joel Mann, laying down bass. And if you're listening to this, it's probably the beginning of your summer. But you'll be playing every Tuesday?

Every Tuesday until sometime in October. So you've got plenty of time to get V to Castine and get V to the Pentagoid Inn and hear some wonderful live jazz and say hello to the main man himself joel man and you are also on instagram right yes yes i am the main man t-h-e-m-a-i-n-e-m-a-n-n correct all right i think that's everything we need to know about where to go what to eat and what to listen to let's get back to the docket welcome Welcome back to the Judge John Hodgman podcast. I'm Monty Belmonte. We're here with Emily Brewster from Merriam-Webster, and I am filled with utter delight or the utmost delight to find out what other word in English uses at besides the pretzels.

Are you ready? I'm ready. OK. I am. I'm on the I'm on the edge of my seat. Yeah. Are you on the oot of your seat? I I'm on the edge of my seat. Yeah. Are you on the oot of your seat? I'm on the oot of my seat.

Now, this is a word that just rolls off the tongue so easily. All right? The word is ootfang thief. Can you use it in a sentence? Not really. I really can't. not not really i really i really can't it is it's it's defined as the right of a lord under medieval english law to try in his manorial court a thief or other felon dwelling in his manner but caught outside it so the oot means out fangen is the past participle of phone meaning to seize or

capture and the thief is just thief and the thief is just thief. And the thief is just thief. Yeah. Now, this word is pretty obscure, but here's the thing. It's actually a more obscure variant of outfung thief. So utfung thief is even rarer than outfung thief. Yeah, no, I mean, I know what outfung thief is. Totally. Though I don't know how to, how do you spell,

what is the word or the word particle after ut or out that you were saying? Because I don't know how to spell it you spell what what is the word or the word particle after oot or out that you were saying because i i don't know how to spell it i can't picture it in my mind f-a-n-g like a dog's fangs oot fong thief yeah it's my new band name gotta be it there's gotta be a psychedelic band called oot fong thief uh-oh ut-o I mean all the other UT words that all the other

UT words that don't have a double T are the U says its name right it's like utility utopia utensil

we are not used to saying ut at the beginning of a word we just we just are not yeah that's right U

it's mostly U I want to say ut-most from now on, and I'm placing the Ute-most important. It would be a natural thing for the language to make this shift completely, but it has not happened. Ut-most is still definitely the favored pronunciation of this word. Ut-most is not going anywhere immediately, but it would kind of make sense for it to switch over to utmost. Why don't we go into the next case? Here's a case from Gabriel. I have a dispute with the word onomatopoeia. I'm told that in other languages, ideaphones exist as a word category. These are words that sound like their meaning similar to onomatopoeia,

but in English, we don't have that category. I would like the Honorable Judge John Hodgman to order onomatopoeia to include ideophone as a category. I would further request that grandiloquent can be the first inclusion in the ideophone category so that I don't have to run for political office in order to make it so. Hmm. Like the grandiloquent 413. That's right. I know what, I know what an onomatopoeia is. That is a word that, that sounds like what it is describing, which the easiest version of it is like a dog. You say a dog's a dog barks because when a dog makes that sound, it often sounds like bark, bark, bark. Or there was one time when I was on the Jonathan Colton cruise and we got off in Loreto, Mexico for an excursion. And I was walking down the street and there was a dog behind a fence.

And that dog did not go bark, bark, bark. I swear to you, the dog went, Mark! Mark! Mark! But of course, onomatopoeia are subjective as well because as I learned reading the Hergé comic books featuring the boy reporter slash adventurer Tintin, a.k.a. T aka tin tin when his dog snowy

barks he doesn't go mark mark mark he goes which i guess is what they think dogs sound like in france you were in france joel did you ever hear a dog go no what is that? That is a French dog bark. I have no idea. Never heard a French dog bark? No. Actually, I haven't. Woo-ah. That's what it sounds like, I guess. In some Spanish-speaking countries, dogs say guau-guau.

Guau-guau. And, of course, bow-wow is an onomatopoeia describing, I guess, that sound that dogs make when they go, wah-wah-wah-wah- go, when they're pathetically begging. Sorry, dogs. I've heard that in France, the ducks say, But Emily Brewster, what is an ideophone? I've never heard of this term before. Have you?

It's like voice over internet protocol. It's got all sorts of ideas that you can use, but using the internet over the phone. All right. I now am going to make wordplay illegal again. Okay. I open the door, you walk through it, and we have an actual expert here. So let's turn it back over to Merriam-Webster, a.k.a. Emily Brewster.

Thank you, Todd. a.k.a. Emily Brewster. Thank you, John. An idiophone is an onomatopoeic element that functions as part of a distinct word class, and it's especially common in some African languages. English is not really, we're not an idiophonic language, but we do have some idiophonic elements. So, for example, words that refer or that mean small

often have an e or if vowel sound in them. Like teeny weeny. Bitsy bitsy. What a cute little baby. You know, the smaller the baby is, you're more likely to call it a BB instead of a baby. So the sound of the word and the pitch of the word conveys a meaning or a feeling that the hearer recognizes, even though it is not imitating a sound, right? Like teeny weeny has a little bit of a feeling of smallness to it yes yes and not not pitch really i know i was using my my pitch in

describing that but an idiophone i thought it was truly the sound and the sounds correlate to ideas in idiophones so we we also have this in if you think about words for things that are slimy or smushy, like there's so many words that start with S-M and S-L that are like slush and slippery and slick. Yeah. We're going to get a lot of letters from the misophonics out there, but yeah, it sounds like that a little bit. I was really curious about this letter. The letter writer, Gabriel, his dispute is actually with the word onomatopoeia. Right. Which is, I mean, I didn't know that people could bring cases to Judge John Hodgman to actually settle matters with words.

This normally I would not allow it. I, this normally I would not, I would not allow it. Normally our cases are between two, two distinct human parties, not with words or concepts. I don't even allow people to bring disputes against themselves, but I wanted, I like, I like talking about on MFPS and this was an interesting subject to me. So I, I made an excuse this time, the way I made an excuse to let Mon Monty do wordplay again. And that was a mistake that I made. So Gabriel, don't make me regret this. Well, I like this very much. You might also like to know another rare related word. And that is if you have a word that is exhibiting on a monopia or that is on a monopiac, you can call it an onomatope. Oh. Onomatope? Yeah. That's terrific. That's a great name for a dog.

Onomatope is second only to ham bone, is a good name for a dog. Whoa, whoa. Hey, onomatope, come on over here. Whoa, whoa. Well, in the case of Gabriel versus onomatopoeia, I say. Sorry to spit all over your brand new board here at WERU. Yeah, exactly. We really are in a new time. But yeah, Gabriel, you don't win. I love the idea of idiophones, and I can sort of see the argument that you're making for grandiloquent, because I guess it's, I mean, it's really subjective, Emily Brewster, but would you say that grandiloquent

as a word conveys, I don't know what to say, just in its sound, a sense of grandiloquence? Yes or no? Is that an ideophone, would you say? I think it has hints of that. I don't feel like I'm an authority enough on idiophones in particular, because English doesn't really have very many of them to say if it truly is. The authority on them is a linguist named Mark Dingamansa, and he's Dutch, so he would know for sure. But it is true that we've got grandiloquent... His name gave me the feeling of Dutch, that's for sure. Definitely an idiophonic name. But there's also loquacious and also sesquipedalian.

You know, there are words that actually evoke their meanings through the very existence of the word itself, it seems. I hope sesquipedalian means incredible confusion on my part because that's the feeling that it evoked in me. It just means very long.

It traces back to a latin phrase meaning a foot and a half so a sesquipedalian word is a word that's like approximately a foot and a half long it's a long it's a long word describing the a long length of words yeah a long length oh okay i like it uh i'm gonna i'm gonna let you try out grandiloquent uh gabriel but onomatopoeia you have, there's no argument with onomatopoeia. Onomatopoeia, you can't have a dispute with that word, A, because it's a word, and B, it's terrific class of words. We've talked before about how farts around the world all have the same sound, no matter what language you're talking in. It's usually put, put, or brap.

But I didn't know, I was doing my own little research on this, that for obvious reasons, snoring, the words that describe snoring are pretty common and have a lot to do with each other. So for example, in Afrikaans, snoring is snork. And in Azerbaijani, it's zor. And in Danishish it's snork as well and in uh in estonian it's nor you know these are onomatopoeias they describe the sound that they're the words imitate the the sound that they are trying to describe but i was very surprised that while most most nations and language groups have maybe one or two words for snore, the Basque people in what we now know as Spain have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 onomatopoeias for snore, including

17 onomatopoeias for snore, including That's five Zs. I want to know more about the snoring culture of the Basque people. And why they got so many good maybe that maybe they just have a genetic palate difference that makes their snoring much more diverse than mine which is really just like cartoon snoring they make excellent cider there i'll tell you that maybe they just take excellent naps as well after they've had their excellent cider i you know i've've never been to that part of the world. I'd like to get there. Hey, you say you're from Virginia originally, Joel? Yep. Where's McLean, Virginia? That's where I'm from. Really? Yeah. Whoa. Because we have a dispute from Kurt in McLean, Virginia. Oh, Kurt, yeah.

Kurt says, I have a dispute with my wonderful, brilliant 16-year-old daughter, Sophia. Sophia insists that the abbreviation spelled B-R-O-S should be pronounced bros. I respectfully but vehemently disagree. It should be brothers. This disagreement ignites phonetic dissonance in our family whenever the Super Marios, Warners, Smashes, or other famous male siblings of this world make an appearance. Thank you kindly for your consideration. So in other words, Sophia wants to say the name of the game is Super Mario Bros,

whereas Kurt wants to say the name of the game is Super Mario Brothers. Do you have any thoughts on this, Emily Brewster? Well, I mean, there's an argument for either one, right? We don't say ulbs for pounds. We say pounds, LBS, right? But we do say mister for MR period. So... Well, that's true.

The pronunciations of abbreviations are just subject to change like any other linguistic form. Well, let's do this specific ruling then. Super Mario Bros or Super Mario Brothers? We'll go around the horn. Joel, brothers or bros? Brothers. Monty? Super Mario Brothers.

Emily Brewster? Brothers, but i think it's only only generational well you think that there are kids out there saying super mario bros and they're okay well yeah well look kids these days i know this is supposed to be a descriptivist language episode but i'm getting pretty prescriptive around this. I don't know about this. I think the old way of doing things is the correct way. I've been around longer and therefore I'm more correct. Warner Bros or Brothers? Warner Bros or Brothers? Joel? Definitely Brothers. Monty? Warner Brothers. Emily, are you going to hold the line? It could be either? Brothers for me personally, but not yes no same same thing same thing generational all right i'll put this one to you what about the famous adult swim cartoon venture brothers or

venture bros joel i have no knowledge you have no knowledge of the venture yes so i can't make it okay i have to recuse myself you're going to recuse yourself on the on basis of cultural ignorance right i understand monty i would do the same it's not a judgment i'm just right I'm going to recuse myself. You're going to recuse yourself on the basis of cultural ignorance. Right. I understand. Monty? Venture Brothers. I would do the same. It's not a judgment. I'm just, right. I'm Venture Brothers.

Emily, what would you say? Yes, same. Venture Brothers. Yes. Well, it so happens that the co-creator of Venture Brothers is a person named Jackson Public, a.k.a. Chris McCulloch, whom I bothered via text while he was on his vacation this Jackson Public, a.k.a. Chris McCulloch, whom I bothered via text while he was on his vacation this morning at 5 a.m.

Luckily, he was in another country. So I reached him at a reasonable hour and I said, even though it is spelled Venture Bros, do you say Venture Bros or Venture Brothers? And according to the co-creator, and I'm sure that his co-creator, Doc Hammer, would support him, it is Venture Brothers. Now, does it matter that the creator of a thing says, this is how you pronounce it? Of course not. I went to Yale for comparative literature.

I know the author is dead. I know the author intent is meaningless. and we leave behind your only text to be interpreted and reinterpreted by 16-year-olds like Sophia, who is going to last far beyond my own gallon of scallops anniversary on this planet. I get it. But for now, I'm just going to say Venture Brothers because it's a really good show, Joel. You should watch it, Venture Brothers. Okay. And the very, very last bit of it is coming out you know it ran for seven

seasons on adult swim very funny cartoon and i this is i'm just i'm just doing this as a plug now at this point yeah i'm not allowed to watch cartoons not allowed to watch cartoons i'm giving you special dispensation monty open the word open the word play floodgates we're also going to open the cartoon floodgates for joel has he to open the cartoon Floodgates for Joel. Has he not watched Dicktown starring none other than Judge John Hodgman? Yeah, didn't you watch Dicktown starring John Hodgman and David Reese? Is that on Hulu?

Well, I can't say because I'm on the right of school strike so I'm not supposed to promote things, but factually, yes. Yes, I don't watch any television since the strike. And this is also a fact and I'm just describing. This is not prescriptive. This is descriptive. Venture Brothers, Radiant is the Blood of the Baboon Heart,

the final film of Venture Brothers Adventures, is available July 21st digitally and on Blu-ray July 25th. It is wonderful. It is a wonderful end to a wonderful piece of art, which you should check out. Sophia, it's called Venture Brothers. Sophia, not bros. These are not bros. They're brothers. And it's got a lot of voice talent in it, including my last trip in the rodeo as Snoopy. Didn't you? Not Snoopy the dog. Didn't you ever watch any Peanuts cartoons, Joel? Just in the comic strips.

Is there something? He flips them together from different newspapers from different days previous. Are you part of a sect that considers moving drawn images to be sacrilegious? I did watch that when I was a young kid. But since I got married, my wife, Michelle, wonderful, wonderful woman, never let me watch The Simpsons. Oh, really? Yeah, so that's kind of culty.

Yeah, there was a time when The Simpsons were kind of controversial. Yeah. And I had my mom and dad saying, I'm not sure you should be watching that. Yep. But then I grew up, Joel. Maybe you should try watching that. Yep. Um, but then, but then I grew up Joel, maybe you should try it anyway.

Emily, Emily Brewster, do you like cartoons? Do you have any cartoons you want to recommend since we're talking about cartoons? And I just put in a shameless plug for the venture brothers. No, no,

I'm not really allowed to recommend cartoons. Oh, wow. All right, Emily, you're not watching cartoons. What's the next project for you over there at Merriam-Webster? Are you going to find another word?

Yes, finding words all the time. Yes. I took care of yeet. Felt good about yeet. That's old. What else have I been working on? I don't know. You know, new word, new day.

New day, new word. All the words. I love it. We need more of them. The answer, the answer is always is more words and more speech. And we'll all enjoy talking to each other. Monty, is the docket clear? The docket is clear, Judge John Hodgman.

That's it for another episode of Judge John Hodgman. Judge John Hodgman was created by Jesse Thornt and John Hodgman. Our producer is Jennifer Marmer. We're on Instagram at Judge John Hodgman was created by Jesse Thorne and John Hodgman. Our producer is Jennifer Marmer. We're on Instagram at Judge John Hodgman. Follow us there for evidence and other photos from the show. And check out the Maximum Fun subreddit to discuss this episode at MaximumFun.reddit.com. And it is officially summer here in the court of Judge John Hodgman. You can hear it in the sound of the rollicking docket. We are looking for your summertime disputes.

Do you have any disputes regarding summer camp or going to the beach? What beach you like to go to? What side of a peninsula do you prefer to beach on? What's the best beach in Virginia? Virginia Beach. Virginia Beach. It's right there in the name.

Do you have any disputes about summer school either summer school the concept or the movie summer school starring mark harman uh what about summer rolls uh or midsommar the movie midsommar dispute over that donna summer this is indisputably one of the greatest donna summer but if you're gabriel out there and you want to take a take a swing at onomatopoeia and Donna Summer, two of the greatest things in the world, by all means, send it in. Everything gets a fair hearing. Maximumfund.org slash JJHO. Summertime disputes are on the docket. And of course, we're eager to hear about all of your disputes on any subject. No case is too small. No case is too big. Some cases are too medium. But you know what? Why don't you let me decide?

Send it in. And I always enjoy receiving your letters. So send them all in to MaximumFun.org slash JJHO. Monty, Emily, Joel, thank you very much. We'll talk to you all again soon. And you too, listener, on the Judge John Hodgman podcast. Maximum Fun. A worker-owned network. listener on the Judge John Hodgman podcast.