Murder, charm, pod, stand...

... they're all supposed to be names for groups of animals. Simply are they, really? Or are they simply made upwards past someone as a kind of joke?

Such questions the enquiring mind wants to know! So, today, a fairly straightforward couple of questions that will open your listen to running downwardly the true origins of words.

1. What are these kinds of terms called? (That is, what exercise you phone call words that denote a specific name for a grouping of a particular kind of animal, such as as "pack" of wolves.) What's THAT chosen? (Once you know this term, mayhap it will be simpler to figure this out...

In this case I happen to know the term for a collection of somethings. If yous've got a drove of things that are non meaningfully divisible, such as baggage or happiness, then that'due south a mass noun. (Which, btw, is never used with the indefinite article! You wouldn't say "a baggage" or "a happiness.")

Past dissimilarity, the term for a collection of capricious things is a collective noun, words like crew, team, committee, or pack. This also includes collective nouns for animals: pod, swarm, flock, etc.

But for this Challenge, what's the specific term for the collective noun of particular kinds of animals?

[ commonage noun animals ]

leads to a bunch of great resources, including the inevitable Wikipedia folio, List of Fauna Names.

But if you lot look at the Wikipedia folio for Commonage Nouns, you'll learn that

"... Some collective nouns are specific to one kind of thing, especially terms of venery , which identify groups of specific animals. For example, "pride" as a term of venery always refers to lions, never to dogs or cows. Other examples come up from popular civilization such equally a grouping of owls, which is called a "parliament."

I'd heard that term earlier, simply couldn't retrieve it without looking at that page. Simply allow'due south drill down a bit on that term ("venery"). Standing further down the page of Collective Nouns, nosotros read:

"The tradition of using "terms of venery" or "nouns of associates," commonage nouns that are specific to certain kinds of animals, stems from an English hunting tradition of the Tardily Center Ages. The way of a consciously developed hunting language came to England from France. It was marked by an all-encompassing proliferation of specialist vocabulary, applying different names to the same feature in different animals. The elements can be shown to have already been part of French and English hunting terminology by the beginning of the 14th century. In the course of the 14th century, information technology became a courtly fashion to extend the vocabulary, and by the 15th century, the tendency had reached exaggerated and even satirical proportions."

There's even a reference to several books, most notably the Book of Saint Albans (1486) which lists 164 terms of venery, many of which are clearly humorous, such equally "a Doctryne of doctoris," "a Sentence of Juges," "a Fightyng of beggers," "a Melody of harpers," "a Disworship of Scottis," and and then along.

Apparently, the Book of Saint Albans became very popular during the 16th century and had the effect of perpetuating many of these terms as office of the Standard English lexicon fifty-fifty if they were originally meant to exist humorous and have long ceased to have any practical application. The popularity of the terms in the modern flow has resulted in the add-on of numerous lighthearted, humorous or facetious collective nouns. As has been noted, "Terms of venery were the linguistic equivalent of silly hats: colorful, affected, fashionable, and very pop. And like most jargon, they were ripe for parody."

But few of these terms were in common utilise after the 16th century. So why are they so well-known today?

Several of these sources point to the book, An Exaltation of Larks, by James Lipton (1968) as causing the revival of many of these terms of venery. In this book, Lipton goes back to fifteenth century manuscripts (such as St. Albans) and dug upward terms for collections of birds and beasts and types of men that he wants to restore into English usage. That is, it was a very conscious try to render terms like "murder of crows" to common usage and brand English more colorful. In this he seems to accept succeeded.

Interestingly, the original subtitle of Lipton'south book was An Exaltation of Larks or, The Venereal Game. Y'all now know that "venereal" is the adjectival form of "venery," and not a reference to an STD, but you can also see why the publishers might want to change the title in subsequent editions. (Besides, it is non to be confused with An Exaltation of Larks, #ane in the Venery Series, past Suanne Laqueur, a novel of family, terrorism, and romance.)

You lot should also know that Lipton clearly is inventing language just for the fun of it. His coinages include "a Kerouac of deadbeats" and a "chatter of finks." Those probably aren't in any original 16th century texts.

2. Where did the term "murder" as a term for a group of crows begin? (Mind y'all, just linking to a random website isn't going to cut it in SRS-land. Y'all need to take a highly credible source, which ways you demand to think nigh what counts as "credible" for etymological sources. It's an interesting question.. what does count?)

Every bit we simply learned, many of these venery terms originated in the 16th century, but and so seem to take fallen out of common utilise not long afterwards. Then, with the publication of Lipton's book in 1968, they've go pop again, primarily as humorous, lighthearted, fun collective nouns.

In the particular case, of "murder" for crows, probably the about authoritative source for the origin of English words is the Oxford English language Dictionary, aka the OED.

The OED is the standard reference text for word origins (their etymology). If you've ever wandered in a library, it'southward usually the largest book (or collection of volumes) in common utilize.

Luckily, at that place's an online version of the OED.

Unluckily, it costs $100/yr to admission it.

Luckily, many libraries offer online OED access every bit a public service.

Unluckily, my local public library does not have this.

Luckily, I take a academy connexion that gives me online access.

And so... I login to my university, connect to the library'southward OED service and search for the word "murder." And detect the second definition:

"murder, n.2". OED Online. December 2021. Oxford University Press. https://www-oed-com.proxy-um.researchport.umd.edu/view/Entry/244990?rskey=k58qLi&result=ii (accessed December 01, 2021).

As you can encounter, the OED dates the employ of "murder of crows" as a commonage noun to 1475 in the Porkington manuscript (reported on in the Transactions of the Philological Society in 1909) where information technology appears as "a morther of crowys."

The Porkington text:

" Written on paper and parchment, information technology contains a remarkable diverseness of texts, mainly in Middle English though a few are in Latin. These cover subjects from political prophecy to instructions for computing the position of the moon, from weather lore to medicine, from an Arthurian poem relating the adventures of Sir Gawain to saints' lives, and from dear poesy and drinking songs to carols. One text defines the qualities of a good horse, another gives lists of terms relating to hunting game - and to carving the game when it reaches the table..."

So, "murder" as a collective noun has a long history, dating at to the lowest degree back to 1475, but its rate of utilise is a relatively contempo phenomenon:

Google NGrams comparing "flock of crows" with "murder of crows."

3. What almost a "Charm" of hummingbirds?

If nosotros do the same OED search for "charm," we have a different kind of outcome.

Checking the OED, we find no mentions of hummingbirds, simply we Practise run across a reference to a "charme of birdes" and of angels (1548)! Elsewhere in the OED you tin find a "charme of finches" too.

Interestingly, other dictionaries (due east.g., Merriam-Webster) take no mention of "charm" as a collective noun. And checking NGRAM once more:

Looks suspiciously like "charm of hummingbirds" started
appearing after 1970

Surprisingly, Lipton'southward volume doesn't mention a "amuse of hummingbirds," but instead refers to that group every bit a "shimmer of hummingbirds" (p. 274) He does mention a "charm of finches," but that's not quite the same thing.

The offset utilise of this commonage term in Google Books tin can be found in Tom Stoppard's play, "Enter a Free Homo" (1978).

If you lot check archival newspapers (eastward.g., Newspapers.com), you lot'll find that the term starts appearing in the early 1980s, usually pointing back to Lipton's book as the source, which is odd, because "amuse" is used for finches, not hummingbirds. My bet is that someone took license with Lipton's text and created the "amuse of hummingbirds" (rather than of finches) somewhere around the mid-1970s. Information technology's such a perfect term that it started to be used more widely.

It's offset to a look a lot like Lipton's goal of adding some fun and joy into our common linguistic communication has succeeded. Every bit he wrote: "What is more important is that a charm of poetry volition have slipped quietly into our lives."

4. And what about a "Mess" of iguanas? (Is that term for real? Or did someone just make it upwardly for fun?)

NGRAMs tells us that "not enough data to plot." And checking archival news gets us back only to 2012 (Austin American Statesman, July ane, 2012). OED doesn't mention mess as a collective term except for people eating together ("the mess of soldiers") and equally a general term for collections ("a mess of eels" or a "mess of milk"--neither of which is specific to that kind of thing).

And then I suspect that "mess of iguanas" is a general categorical term, much as you lot might describe that pit of snakes nether your house equally a "mess of snakes." I don't actually believe there is a single venery term for a collection of iguanas.

v. And lastly, what do yous call a bunch of kangaroos? How erstwhile is THAT term?

Checking back on the Wikipedia folio for animals, we find that a collection of kangaroos (dare I say "mess of kangaroos"?) is chosen either a courtroom, a troop, a herd, or a mob.

NGRAMs, to compare the most common uses of the kangaroo venery terms:

NGRAMs comparing "mob of kangaroos" with "troop of kangaroos."
"mob" leads, but at that place are a set of people who use "troop"!

Nosotros need to carry in mind that the term "kangaroo" but entered into common English usage in 1773 (per OED: " 1773 J. Hawkesworth Acct. Voy. Southern Hemisphere Three. 578 [1st Voy. Cook] The next day our Kangaroo was dressed for dinner and proved most splendid meat.")

The starting time archival paper mention of a mob comes from the N Wales Chronicle (Wales), July eight, 1845. In the story, Dan (not me!) is being carried away past a rogue kangaroo, and the author writes that not only would he not intervene, only "I wouldn't have saved him from a mob of kangaroos..."

SearchResearch Lessons

Linguistic communication is equally language does--it's adequately hopeless to be prescriptivist virtually these things. Just it's pretty articulate that some terms of venery really are ancient, only then fell into decay, and were then revived in our lifetimes. The fact that nosotros can figure out such things is a testament to the coverage of online content.

Only let's touch on a few lessons to shut out today'south SRS.

1. Etymology is tricky--you demand to use multiple sources to triangulate on a trustworthy story virtually the origins of a word or phrase. Hither we used a combination of newspapers, books, and dictionaries (peculiarly the OED) as reference sources. It's tempting to do a quick Google search and find a story nigh word origins, only be certain to get a few confirmations (and Not just duplications) of the story. If you can find the word in actual use in an bodily original source, so much the amend.

2. The OED is a bang-up resource. It really is a masterwork. (See: The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary: Simon Winchester, 2016, for the whole amazing backstory of how the OED came to be. In the tale you'll larn why it'due south such a remarkable and trustworthy source.) More to the betoken, it is the master reference on matters etymological in English, especially for older terms. (Since it'southward updated infrequently, information technology's not then great to the origins of contempo terms such as "deplatform" or "cubesat.")

3. NGRAMs can be used to compare phrases and their occurence (in books) over time. I'll write more about NGRAMs in a future post, simply annotation that you tin can now compare unlike corpora (e.g. British English vs. American English)

Search on!