CHICKEN CHICKEN.

May 16, 2007 by 46 Comments

Chicken chicken chicken chicken, chicken chicken (chicken chicken chicken); chicken chicken chicken chicken: chicken! (Chicken chicken.)

Comments

  1. Kári Tulinius says
    May 16, 2007 at 10:15 am

    Chicken chicken chicken “chicken,” “chicken” chicken “chicken.” Chicken chicken chicken “chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken” [Chicken Chicken, 1893]. Chicken chicken chicken chicken. Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken; chicken chicken chicken, chicken chicken chicken chicken, chicken chicken chicken, chicken: chicken, chicken, chicken, chicken, chicken—chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken petunia.

  2. Cliff Crawford says
    May 16, 2007 at 10:39 am

    Duck?

  3. Justin the Mad Latinist says
    May 16, 2007 at 10:45 am

    > Chicken chicken chicken “chicken,” “chicken” chicken “chicken.”
    Chicken! Chicken chicken chicken CHICKEN! Chicken Chicken Chicken! Chicken chiken chicken chicken, Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken 9.36.28:

    Gallus, Galle, gallum gallum gallus gallo gallus, gallus gallus gallos gallus gallus—gallus gallus—gallus.
    Chicken: chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken, chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken—chicken chicken.

    Chicken?

  4. zhoen says
    May 16, 2007 at 11:15 am

    Chick. En.

  5. Ran says
    May 16, 2007 at 12:05 pm

    Rooster?

  6. John Cowan says
    May 16, 2007 at 12:13 pm

    Chicken.

  7. Siganus Sutor says
    May 16, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    Time to talk turkey now:
    Rhubarb rhubarb “Rhubarb Rhubarb”? Rhubarb rhubarb-rhubarb, rhubarb! Rhubarb, rhubarb Rhubarb…

  8. Sonja says
    May 16, 2007 at 12:58 pm

    Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken. Chicken chicken? Chicken.

  9. dearieme says
    May 16, 2007 at 1:57 pm

    When you ask an Aussie how bush tucker tastes, he answers “like chicken”. Or “chook”.

  10. grijl says
    May 16, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    kurichnego kurichnego kurichnego impereilizm !

  11. Ben Zimmer says
    May 16, 2007 at 2:31 pm

    Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich! (Malkovich.)

  12. Ben Zimmer says
    May 16, 2007 at 2:34 pm

    Mun, mun mun mun. Mun mun. Mun, mun?

  13. Sili says
    May 16, 2007 at 3:21 pm

    Duck duck goose?

  14. Cliff Crawford says
    May 16, 2007 at 3:23 pm

    And while we’re at it, Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

  15. Sili says
    May 16, 2007 at 3:48 pm

    On second schtroumpf, schtroumpf that schtroumpf. That is, Les Schtroumpf schtroumpfed of this first.
    For our schtroumpfish schtroumpf: “Smølf”.
    A schtroumpf could be: “Den smølf smølfede ham lige i smølfen.”

  16. bulbul says
    May 16, 2007 at 5:31 pm

    Speaker A: Vy ste všetci toto. Keby ste sa netoto a radšej zatoto, tak by sme to toto už dávno vytoto a nemuseli by sme sa natoto jak takí toto. Ale vy radšej vytoto a roztoto a nie aby ste celý toto poriadne toto a toto.
    Speaker B: Ale šak sa netoto. Dneska zatoto a zajtra to celé toto bude vytoto až sa z toho všetci toto pototo.
    Note: that’s a reasonably accurate transcript of a real conversation.
    In case of emergency, replace “toto” by “jebať”. Works just as well in most cases.

  17. Jangari says
    May 16, 2007 at 8:00 pm

    To represent the antipodean element:
    Wilik-wilik, wilik-wilik wilik-wilik “Wilik-wilik” wilik-wilik.
    Wilik-wilik wilik-wilik Wilik-wilik wilik-wilik wilik-wilik wilik-wilik. Wilik-wilik wilik.
    -Wilik wilik.
    That’s what a galah sounds like!

  18. Jordan says
    May 16, 2007 at 8:38 pm

    Cheeky.

  19. Mark S. says
    May 16, 2007 at 8:43 pm

    Shi shi shi shi shi shi shi….
    But I think Steve Martin said it best: “Hup hup hup hup hup hup hup hup hup hup hup.”

  20. John Emerson says
    May 16, 2007 at 9:05 pm

    Dead link. Most frustrating post ever.

  21. John Emerson says
    May 16, 2007 at 9:50 pm

    OK, got through. I’m fine now.

  22. Noetica says
    May 16, 2007 at 10:14 pm

    Chic, Ken! (Ken ye chicks?)

  23. stercus says
    May 16, 2007 at 10:45 pm

    cluck!

  24. KCinDC says
    May 17, 2007 at 12:37 am

    Reagan Reagan Reagan Reagan Reagan.

  25. Jangari says
    May 17, 2007 at 4:01 am

    I can’t let this go without alluding to that classic Monty Python sketch:
    Don’t worry dear, I’ll have your spam, I love it. I’m having the spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam and spam!
    Baked beans are off!
    Oh, can I have spam instead?
    You mean you want spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam and spam?! Blechhh!

  26. gijsd says
    May 17, 2007 at 6:39 am

    Why not let the bird speak for itself? A sparrow for example.
    DE MUS
    Tjielp tjielp – tjielp tjielp tjielp
    tjielp tjielp tjielp – tjielp tjielp
    tjielp tjielp tjielp tjielp tjielp tjielp
    tjielp tjielp tjielp
    Tjielp
    etc.
    (c) Jan Hanlo, 1954
    http://www.muurgedichten.nl/hanlo.html

  27. Gary says
    May 17, 2007 at 6:52 am

    This is just a cheap ripoff of the old badger loop:
    http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/badgers/

  28. Dave says
    May 17, 2007 at 12:19 pm

    Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers Badgers mushrooms, MUSHROOMS!

  29. SN says
    May 17, 2007 at 1:56 pm

    Developers, developers, developers!

  30. vanya says
    May 18, 2007 at 3:50 am

    Pollo kuritsa huhn kur koko. Gallus házityúk dajaaj kana poulet. Ayam hohn niwatori höns, “galinha” tavuk kokoshka yi ji.

  31. DanW says
    May 18, 2007 at 10:59 am

    CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG!
    Now, what did I start with again?

  32. Teju says
    May 18, 2007 at 12:57 pm

    Adiye.

  33. L.A. says
    May 18, 2007 at 6:53 pm

    Huhn huhn huhn huhn huehnchen huehnchen huhn huhn huhn.
    huhn
    nhuh
    hnhu
    uhnh
    huhn!

  34. Justin the Mad Latinist says
    May 19, 2007 at 4:33 pm

    YOu know, Wilsonart’s post almost actually fits 😉

  35. David Marjanović says
    May 19, 2007 at 5:41 pm

    Should I resist?
    Naaah…
    Wenn Fliegen hinter Fliegen fliegen, fliegen Fliegen Fliegen nach.

  36. Ryan says
    May 20, 2007 at 3:37 am

    In a certain dialect of Finnish (Rauma) the following works: Kokko, kokko kokko koko kokko. ‘Kokko, bring together the whole bonfire!’

  37. David Marjanović says
    May 21, 2007 at 7:02 am

    ARGH! A tongue-twister with long and short consonants! (Or is koko a typo?)

  38. AntC says
    May 19, 2025 at 1:03 am

    CHICKEN! EGG! CHICKEN! EGG!
    Now, what did I start with again?

    Surprisingly, most scientists agree that the original domestication of chickens was done for the purpose of cockfighting, not eggs or meat.
    [Why we domesticated chickens, needs subscription]

    Surprising claims need surprisingly good evidence methinks. Contra the first comment on the video, “a simple Google search” did not “easily demonstrate” any such thing. (And it’s not The History Guy’s practice to provide copious references, although he’s usually well-researched.)

    Further digging took me down multiple rabbit-holes of self-reinforcing games of whispers. The only academic I could track down is Eben Gering, who seems to write more on (re-)feralisation rather than domestication.

    The archaeological evidence is that prized cockfighting birds were included/memorialised in grave goods. Well duh: would you memorialise a broiler hen or its eggs?

    The genetic evidence seems to be modern fowl were domesticated from S.E. Asian Wild Red Junglefowl, Thailand before 6000 BC. That doesn’t tell is whether it was the cocks, the hens, the chickens or the eggs that were prized.

    Is there linguistic evidence? For example S.E. Asian words for hen/chicken/egg being more ancient than cock(fight)/cockpit?

    P.S. I expect the Kusaal for ‘cockpit’ will rapidly clear this up.

  39. Trond Engen says
    May 19, 2025 at 5:47 am

    We had a long discussion on chicken domestication starting here – very much including Kusaal.

  40. David Eddyshaw says
    May 19, 2025 at 6:03 am

    Sadly “cockfight” cannot be reconstructed to proto-Oti-Volta. I presume that the practice was imported to West Africa by Christian missionaries.

    However, linguistic evidence does resolve another notorious problem.

    Cognates of Kusaal gɛl “egg” appear in every language, whereas Western Oti-Volta does not share the “chicken” etymon seen everywhere else (e.g. Nawdm kɔ̀rgá, Moba kólĝ, Mbelime kódíkɛ̀.)

    Accordingly, we must conclude that the Egg is a more ancient feature of local culture than the Chicken, which must have been independently innovated twice.

  41. Hans says
    May 19, 2025 at 7:16 am

    Supported by PIE, where “egg” can be reconstructed for the Proto-Language, but not “chicken” or “cock”. 😉

  42. PlasticPaddy says
    May 19, 2025 at 7:32 am

    Naively one might think that eggs are an easier prey than birds, since they (the eggs) are incapable of flight…

  43. David Eddyshaw says
    May 19, 2025 at 7:46 am

    In the jungles of southeast Asia, feral hens regularly take out tigers that threaten their eggs.

  44. languagehat says
    May 19, 2025 at 8:16 am

    they (the eggs) are incapable of flight

    Counterpoint.

  45. David Marjanović says
    May 19, 2025 at 11:38 am

    kólĝ

    A falling tone on [g]…?

  46. David Eddyshaw says
    May 19, 2025 at 12:51 pm

    No: the somewhat opaque conventional orthography omits /ə/: this is really /kólə̂g/ or even (depending on dialect) /kólə́gə̀/. The Bimoba dialect (or very closely related language) spoken on the Ghana side has a Kusaaloid orthography which mostly writes i instead, so you get wurik “navel” for Moba-of-Togo ŋúlĝ.

    Nawdm orthography also omits /ə/, though it doesn’t have the word-final /ə/. Mooré, too, which doesn’t really have all those apparent consonant clusters seen in writing (basically, only the ones where the first element is a nasal consonant are real.)

    Must be a Francophone linguist thing. Gallic logic …

    In their defence, this /ə/ is always epenthetic, and you can make a good argument (in all these languages) that it’s not a real phoneme at all. It ends up with a falling tone in Moba kólĝ via high tone spreading from the root.

    At one stage I experimented with a for-internal-use-only orthography of this kind for my Kusaal grammar before I returned to my senses. It’s not difficult to make the convention work at least as well (or as badly) for Kusaal as for Moba, though.

Speak Your Mind

*