Category Archives: Folk speech

Pelican Soup

Text: 

“Alright, here’s the riddle. A guy walks into a restaurant and asks for Pelican Soup and they serve it to him. And then, after he drinks the soup, he walks out of the restaurant and kills himself. Why did he kill himself?”

[For around the next twenty minutes there is a back and forth conversation between me and the riddle teller, where I ask questions about the given scenario and the riddler responds with yes/no and guiding comments. The conversation is too long to record completely in this post, but the general trend of the questions went from asking about the quality of the pelican soup, asking about the man’s family, discovering the man’s wife is dead, and uncovering the circumstances surrounding her death. The text is recorded from the end of the discussion.]

Me: “So the spouse’s body parts are not in the pelican soup.”

Teller: “Not in the one that he’s drinking at the restaurant.”

Me: “Oh! So did they make pelican soup out of her? …She’s not a pelican.”

Teller: “Um… You’re like on fire right now but you’re still not exactly there. Why did they make pelican soup out of her?”

Me: “Cause they were hungry.”

Teller: “Why were they hungry?”

Me: “Cause they were stranded on an island.”

Teller: “So why did the man kill himself?”

Me: “I’m sure that it would be bad to eat your spouse. I don’t think it would be very enjoyable, and to eat pelican soup and be like ‘hm, this pelican soup tastes different from the one that I had before – oh it was human flesh…’”

Teller: “Ok, so just for the sake of understanding, could you phrase what the story was then.”

Me: “I think they got stranded on the island, they did something with the spouse and she fucking died, I don’t know exactly… and then the friend was like ‘well I guess we’re going to have to cook her!’ and they didn’t tell the dude, and then they ate ‘pelican soup.’ And then he went back and was like “I’m so sad about my wife, this pelican soup tastes different.”

Teller: You got it! Let’s go. 

Context: 

I collected this riddle/game in a group call where this riddle was performed on me. The person telling the riddle had originally learned of it online from a video, but also had heard it from his friends throughout the years. Other members of the call also noted that they had heard the riddle from various different settings while growing up, such as summer camps, from friends at school, etc.. During this call of around 6 people, I was the only one who had not known of the riddle beforehand, and thus was the only one attempting to find the solution. Typically, as both the teller and other members of the group informed me, the riddle would be performed on a group of people who would collectively try to solve the riddle together. 

Analysis: 

The Pelican Soup problem provides very little information in the initialization itself, and thus requires the solver to continuously interact and question the teller and form a solution based on the information gained in this process. In this way, “Pelican Soup” acts closer to a logic puzzle or game than an actual riddle, with the main source of amusement coming from its dynamic interactivity between teller and solver. While there was only one solver in this particular performance of the puzzle, the typically communal context that this problem is given in also adds an additional level of interaction amongst the various solvers as well, as they each contribute a variety of questions to reach the truth. The Pelican Soup Problem, in this way, greatly resembles “20 Questions” – a game where solvers must identify a specific item that a teller is thinking of within twenty questions – though “Pelican Soup” possesses a more complex solution that warrants an unlimited number of questions. 

An additional level of entertainment comes from the morbidity of the scenario itself, based around an event of suicide and cannibalization. Given that this particular instance of the problem was learned in childhood and through programs like summer camps, I would argue that the level of morbidity in the puzzle acts as a sort of test of adulthood for those still in their youth – the better that they are able solve the puzzle and comprehend its darkness, the greater they are prepared for the more serious and severe “adult world.”

You’re milloneion

Text: A “rebus” (visual puzzle) – “You’re milloneion”

Informant: NS

Ethnicity: Indian

Primary Language: English

Age: 26

Residence: San Francisco

Context: MILLONEION is a visual puzzle that can be interpreted as “one in a million.” (It’s the word “million,” with “one” interjected into the middle of it). The informant said that the phrase was popular when he was in middle school, and was used as a way to show affection between friends and peers. 

Analysis:

The informant is male, and primarily interacted with other male friends and peers at a time when toxic masculinity was very prevalent, contributed to by middle school environments and the pressure to fit in. Toxic masculinity is defined as a set of attitudes and behaviors associated with societal stereotypes and expectations of men that have had a negative impact on men and general society; a key aspect of this social concept revolves around men not showing any outward affection or “softness,” especially in the presence of other men. In my opinion, using the phrase “you’re milloneion” was a fun, subtle way for the informant and his friends to show affection and express gratitude and appreciation for their friendships without being too overt about it, essentially finding a workaround for toxic masculinity norms.

HAGS

Text: Something traditional you write or draw in a yearbook – “HAGS”

Informant: SK

Ethnicity: Indian

Primary Language: English

Age: 26

Residence: San Francisco

Context: 

The phrase “HAGS” started being written in yearbooks when the informant was in elementary school and was commonly used until she graduated high school. It stands for “Have a Great Summer.” The informant recalled being confused when she first saw it, interpreting it literally until she questioned the friend who wrote it about the “insult” and was informed that it was actually an acronym with a positive message.

Analysis: 

HAGS is a phrase that marks the transition from the school year to summer break. The word “hag” has negative connotations, being defined as a witch or ugly old woman; the phrase is therefore mischievous in nature, a gag joke meant to trick those who are unfamiliar with the acronym to interpret well-wishes as an insult. This reflects the shift in peer dynamics amongst children during the school year, which reflects a more serious and formal environment, to the summertime, which is more relaxed. Furthermore, social dynamics amongst children, who are still learning to process their emotions, often comes with well-meaning (sometimes mean) pranks and banter. Groups of children who know what the acronym stood for vs. those who do not create an inside joke, and the feeling of being “in on it” is often irresistible to young minds. Eventually, once the phrase became widespread enough, it became the embodiment of the yearly ritual of signing yearbooks, integrating itself into the “folklore” of primary education.

Constant change in the River

Nationality: Ethiopian/Italian

Primary Language: English

Age: 21

Occupation: Student

Residence: Los Angeles

Date: 2/20/2024

Text:

“No man ever steps in the same river twice. For it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man” 

Context:

This is a proverb that was told to the participant by his father. He explained that he moved schools quite a lot when he was younger and sometimes complained about the impermanence of his life. He explained that his father used this proverb to soothe him and rationalize his fears. It was explained to him as a metaphor that signifies how you are always changing as an individual. He reflected on how his father reminded him to accept change and to not focus on it as a negative as it is inevitable.

Analysis:

It is interesting how a proverb can be used to soothe emotions and help rationalize their thoughts. Hearing the participant’s interpretation of the proverb made me ponder if it had an even more developed meaning. To add on, it also signifies how the world around us is always changing. In a more literal term you can never step in the same river, because the currents are always changing and flowing, causing there to be constant movement within the river. In a more philosophical way, it reminds you that experiences can only be lived once as nothing is permanent, different factors are always changing in one’s life; from a range of emotions, successes, failures, relationships, and even environmental.

Good Enough For Government Work

Occupation: Data Analysis
Residence: Salem, Virginia
Language: English

Text: “Good enough for government work” (folk speech/proverb)

Context:

G is my father, who was born and raised in Richmond, Virginia, who now lives in Salem, VA. His family owned a lot of farmland and they didn’t quite live in Richmond, but about 25 minutes outside of the city. It was pretty rural, definitely not suburban, but there were a few neighbors every once in awhile. He has many many pieces of folklore that he says, he has heard people say, and he has from books or movies, in my family he is pretty much known to have a proverb or saying for everything.

G- “I have done a job, be it raking leaves, or cutting grass, or painting a big round table, where I did the best job I could do but it could never be perfectly done and when I finished the job, I say ‘that’s good enough for government work’, meaning if it had been inspected by a government official, they would sign off on the work being done and complete.”

Interviewer – And where did you first learn of it, or if you don’t remember, have you heard anyone else ever use it?

G- “I learned it from my father, but I have heard many people use it.”

Analysis:

The phrase “Good enough for government work” is a colloquial expression often used to suggest that a task or job has been completed adequately but not necessarily perfectly. It implies a level of acceptable or sufficient performance, often in a somewhat tongue-in-cheek manner. When researching where it cane from, the origin of the saying is not precisely known, but it has become a common part of American English, particularly in informal settings. In my interpretation it is somewhat of a criticism or social commentary of the government and the checks that go into things It has evolved into a broader expression acknowledging that achieving perfection in certain situations may not be practical or necessary. It can be used humorously or pragmatically to convey a sense of meeting a standard without excessive attention to detail.