Is there a word for the act of clearing one's throat?
A lot of people, especially those with a throat infection, make an oft irritating guttural noise to clear their throat. What is the act called?
single-word-requests
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
add a comment |
A lot of people, especially those with a throat infection, make an oft irritating guttural noise to clear their throat. What is the act called?
single-word-requests
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
6
It's called clearing your throat.
– Jim
Oct 7 '13 at 5:27
1
In swedish, we have a single word for it (harkla), but when translating that it only givesclears his throat(Translate). I don't think there is a word with the same description and a single word but still covering all cases.
– Robin Castlin
Oct 7 '13 at 8:50
What's up with 'hawk' as the unmarked word? 'hock' is all I've ever known. Does everyone here have the cot-caught merger? or is it just an eggcorn?
– Mitch
Oct 11 '13 at 0:04
@Mitch Hawk is the original word; your hock is an alteration, cot-caught merger or not.
– Aeon Akechi
Jun 16 '16 at 0:02
add a comment |
A lot of people, especially those with a throat infection, make an oft irritating guttural noise to clear their throat. What is the act called?
single-word-requests
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
A lot of people, especially those with a throat infection, make an oft irritating guttural noise to clear their throat. What is the act called?
single-word-requests
single-word-requests
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
asked Oct 7 '13 at 4:44
user52023user52023
2574514
2574514
6
It's called clearing your throat.
– Jim
Oct 7 '13 at 5:27
1
In swedish, we have a single word for it (harkla), but when translating that it only givesclears his throat(Translate). I don't think there is a word with the same description and a single word but still covering all cases.
– Robin Castlin
Oct 7 '13 at 8:50
What's up with 'hawk' as the unmarked word? 'hock' is all I've ever known. Does everyone here have the cot-caught merger? or is it just an eggcorn?
– Mitch
Oct 11 '13 at 0:04
@Mitch Hawk is the original word; your hock is an alteration, cot-caught merger or not.
– Aeon Akechi
Jun 16 '16 at 0:02
add a comment |
6
It's called clearing your throat.
– Jim
Oct 7 '13 at 5:27
1
In swedish, we have a single word for it (harkla), but when translating that it only givesclears his throat(Translate). I don't think there is a word with the same description and a single word but still covering all cases.
– Robin Castlin
Oct 7 '13 at 8:50
What's up with 'hawk' as the unmarked word? 'hock' is all I've ever known. Does everyone here have the cot-caught merger? or is it just an eggcorn?
– Mitch
Oct 11 '13 at 0:04
@Mitch Hawk is the original word; your hock is an alteration, cot-caught merger or not.
– Aeon Akechi
Jun 16 '16 at 0:02
6
6
It's called clearing your throat.
– Jim
Oct 7 '13 at 5:27
It's called clearing your throat.
– Jim
Oct 7 '13 at 5:27
1
1
In swedish, we have a single word for it (
harkla), but when translating that it only gives clears his throat (Translate). I don't think there is a word with the same description and a single word but still covering all cases.– Robin Castlin
Oct 7 '13 at 8:50
In swedish, we have a single word for it (
harkla), but when translating that it only gives clears his throat (Translate). I don't think there is a word with the same description and a single word but still covering all cases.– Robin Castlin
Oct 7 '13 at 8:50
What's up with 'hawk' as the unmarked word? 'hock' is all I've ever known. Does everyone here have the cot-caught merger? or is it just an eggcorn?
– Mitch
Oct 11 '13 at 0:04
What's up with 'hawk' as the unmarked word? 'hock' is all I've ever known. Does everyone here have the cot-caught merger? or is it just an eggcorn?
– Mitch
Oct 11 '13 at 0:04
@Mitch Hawk is the original word; your hock is an alteration, cot-caught merger or not.
– Aeon Akechi
Jun 16 '16 at 0:02
@Mitch Hawk is the original word; your hock is an alteration, cot-caught merger or not.
– Aeon Akechi
Jun 16 '16 at 0:02
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Historically, hawk (also hock) meant to clear the throat in the general sense. Now it refers to gathering phlegm for spitting, by a progressive closing of the tongue against the back of the throat, accompanied by an outrush of air, a rising pitch, and vocalisation.
Retch also meant to clear the throat or cough up, from the Old English verb hræcan, to cough up or spit phlegm (hraca). Now it refers to the sound and motion of vomiting, either gagging or dry-heaving, often with a falling guttural sound.
So while we have had two good strong English one-syllable verbs to express what you mean, they’ve both drifted into new roles. In the present, I think ahem is the best verb we’ve got:
My coworker Bill is just getting over a throat infection and was ahemming all day. Better than last week, when he would hawk loogies into his handkerchief.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
1
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
1
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
3
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
|
show 1 more comment
If you are clearing your throat to draw attention I would use ahem (hem). If you are clearing your throat to get rid of mucus I would use hawk.
You would hawk a loogie. And if you had no manners you would say, "ahem" to get everyone's attention before hand.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
1
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
add a comment |
Am I the First to break it to you? It's "Ahem".
D'Oh!
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
add a comment |
I think 'hacking' is a common term for clearing the throat. I have heard 'hock' used but never 'hawk'. Please, Hawk, being our fine feathered friends, is already well defined, can we leave it that way? Can Americans leave any word alone. Do we have to try and destroy every word at every opportunity?! Hawks are beautiful and they soar majestically. Loogies are ugly and they drop like a stone.
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
add a comment |
what about "hork" or "horking" which means clearing your throat, too?
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
1
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
1
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
add a comment |
protected by tchrist♦ Jul 26 '15 at 0:35
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Historically, hawk (also hock) meant to clear the throat in the general sense. Now it refers to gathering phlegm for spitting, by a progressive closing of the tongue against the back of the throat, accompanied by an outrush of air, a rising pitch, and vocalisation.
Retch also meant to clear the throat or cough up, from the Old English verb hræcan, to cough up or spit phlegm (hraca). Now it refers to the sound and motion of vomiting, either gagging or dry-heaving, often with a falling guttural sound.
So while we have had two good strong English one-syllable verbs to express what you mean, they’ve both drifted into new roles. In the present, I think ahem is the best verb we’ve got:
My coworker Bill is just getting over a throat infection and was ahemming all day. Better than last week, when he would hawk loogies into his handkerchief.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
1
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
1
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
3
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
|
show 1 more comment
Historically, hawk (also hock) meant to clear the throat in the general sense. Now it refers to gathering phlegm for spitting, by a progressive closing of the tongue against the back of the throat, accompanied by an outrush of air, a rising pitch, and vocalisation.
Retch also meant to clear the throat or cough up, from the Old English verb hræcan, to cough up or spit phlegm (hraca). Now it refers to the sound and motion of vomiting, either gagging or dry-heaving, often with a falling guttural sound.
So while we have had two good strong English one-syllable verbs to express what you mean, they’ve both drifted into new roles. In the present, I think ahem is the best verb we’ve got:
My coworker Bill is just getting over a throat infection and was ahemming all day. Better than last week, when he would hawk loogies into his handkerchief.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
1
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
1
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
3
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
|
show 1 more comment
Historically, hawk (also hock) meant to clear the throat in the general sense. Now it refers to gathering phlegm for spitting, by a progressive closing of the tongue against the back of the throat, accompanied by an outrush of air, a rising pitch, and vocalisation.
Retch also meant to clear the throat or cough up, from the Old English verb hræcan, to cough up or spit phlegm (hraca). Now it refers to the sound and motion of vomiting, either gagging or dry-heaving, often with a falling guttural sound.
So while we have had two good strong English one-syllable verbs to express what you mean, they’ve both drifted into new roles. In the present, I think ahem is the best verb we’ve got:
My coworker Bill is just getting over a throat infection and was ahemming all day. Better than last week, when he would hawk loogies into his handkerchief.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
Historically, hawk (also hock) meant to clear the throat in the general sense. Now it refers to gathering phlegm for spitting, by a progressive closing of the tongue against the back of the throat, accompanied by an outrush of air, a rising pitch, and vocalisation.
Retch also meant to clear the throat or cough up, from the Old English verb hræcan, to cough up or spit phlegm (hraca). Now it refers to the sound and motion of vomiting, either gagging or dry-heaving, often with a falling guttural sound.
So while we have had two good strong English one-syllable verbs to express what you mean, they’ve both drifted into new roles. In the present, I think ahem is the best verb we’ve got:
My coworker Bill is just getting over a throat infection and was ahemming all day. Better than last week, when he would hawk loogies into his handkerchief.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
answered Oct 7 '13 at 6:20
Jon PurdyJon Purdy
28.2k787134
28.2k787134
1
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
1
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
3
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
|
show 1 more comment
1
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
1
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
3
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
1
1
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
This seems to be a repeat answer.
– Tom
Oct 7 '13 at 14:37
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
@Tom: But it has more information and makes a different recommendation.
– Jon Purdy
Oct 8 '13 at 2:39
1
1
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
If you have the exact same answer as someone else, the point of stack is to improve their answer. However I have to read through yours to find out that I have already read that answer (actually answers since you took two words).
– Tom
Oct 8 '13 at 14:02
3
3
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Editing the other post to include Jon's additional information would be far too radical of a change. Just because two answers include some information in common doesn't mean they're duplicates.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 4:16
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
@Tom Please also see Etiquette for simultaneous duplicate answers on Meta. Usual ELU practice for cases like this is to allow similar answers to stand on their own merits, and critical comments interfere with that. Please flag a moderator instead if you think two answers are too similar.
– Bradd Szonye
Oct 10 '13 at 23:34
|
show 1 more comment
If you are clearing your throat to draw attention I would use ahem (hem). If you are clearing your throat to get rid of mucus I would use hawk.
You would hawk a loogie. And if you had no manners you would say, "ahem" to get everyone's attention before hand.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
1
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
add a comment |
If you are clearing your throat to draw attention I would use ahem (hem). If you are clearing your throat to get rid of mucus I would use hawk.
You would hawk a loogie. And if you had no manners you would say, "ahem" to get everyone's attention before hand.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
1
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
add a comment |
If you are clearing your throat to draw attention I would use ahem (hem). If you are clearing your throat to get rid of mucus I would use hawk.
You would hawk a loogie. And if you had no manners you would say, "ahem" to get everyone's attention before hand.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
If you are clearing your throat to draw attention I would use ahem (hem). If you are clearing your throat to get rid of mucus I would use hawk.
You would hawk a loogie. And if you had no manners you would say, "ahem" to get everyone's attention before hand.
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
edited Oct 7 '13 at 14:26
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
answered Oct 7 '13 at 4:56
RyeɃreḁdRyeɃreḁd
15.9k43678
15.9k43678
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
1
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
add a comment |
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
1
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
Ahem is essentially an interjection/ exclamation. To verbify that may be acceptable but not desirable. Hawk is mere onomatopoeia as is ahem.
– Kris
Oct 7 '13 at 6:33
1
1
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
@Kris: Mere is too dismissive. Onomatopoeia may not be so formal, but it is evocative!
– Jon Purdy
Oct 7 '13 at 7:09
add a comment |
Am I the First to break it to you? It's "Ahem".
D'Oh!
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
add a comment |
Am I the First to break it to you? It's "Ahem".
D'Oh!
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
add a comment |
Am I the First to break it to you? It's "Ahem".
D'Oh!
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
Am I the First to break it to you? It's "Ahem".
D'Oh!
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
answered 9 hours ago
Effector DhanushanthEffector Dhanushanth
1331618
1331618
add a comment |
add a comment |
I think 'hacking' is a common term for clearing the throat. I have heard 'hock' used but never 'hawk'. Please, Hawk, being our fine feathered friends, is already well defined, can we leave it that way? Can Americans leave any word alone. Do we have to try and destroy every word at every opportunity?! Hawks are beautiful and they soar majestically. Loogies are ugly and they drop like a stone.
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
add a comment |
I think 'hacking' is a common term for clearing the throat. I have heard 'hock' used but never 'hawk'. Please, Hawk, being our fine feathered friends, is already well defined, can we leave it that way? Can Americans leave any word alone. Do we have to try and destroy every word at every opportunity?! Hawks are beautiful and they soar majestically. Loogies are ugly and they drop like a stone.
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
add a comment |
I think 'hacking' is a common term for clearing the throat. I have heard 'hock' used but never 'hawk'. Please, Hawk, being our fine feathered friends, is already well defined, can we leave it that way? Can Americans leave any word alone. Do we have to try and destroy every word at every opportunity?! Hawks are beautiful and they soar majestically. Loogies are ugly and they drop like a stone.
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
I think 'hacking' is a common term for clearing the throat. I have heard 'hock' used but never 'hawk'. Please, Hawk, being our fine feathered friends, is already well defined, can we leave it that way? Can Americans leave any word alone. Do we have to try and destroy every word at every opportunity?! Hawks are beautiful and they soar majestically. Loogies are ugly and they drop like a stone.
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
answered Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
Phil1357Phil1357
1
1
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
add a comment |
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
Hacking does not mean clearing your throat to me, but giving little, dry, rasping coughs. Or indeed (since we’re on the topic of hawks) to train a young hawk. Most of this answer is pure peeving, though, which is off-topic here. Words have multiple meanings, and they always have had. Using ‘hawk’ as synonymous with ‘hock’ in no way reduces the beauty of the avian hawks.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Oct 29 '13 at 11:40
add a comment |
what about "hork" or "horking" which means clearing your throat, too?
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
1
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
1
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
add a comment |
what about "hork" or "horking" which means clearing your throat, too?
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
1
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
1
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
add a comment |
what about "hork" or "horking" which means clearing your throat, too?
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
what about "hork" or "horking" which means clearing your throat, too?
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
answered Jul 25 '15 at 22:51
GahaGaha
1
1
1
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
1
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
add a comment |
1
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
1
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
1
1
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
Please provide some evidence for the use of this word.
– curiousdannii
Jul 25 '15 at 23:27
1
1
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
I think you mean hawking , which might not be a bad answer if you provided some support.
– TimLymington
Jul 26 '15 at 14:40
add a comment |
protected by tchrist♦ Jul 26 '15 at 0:35
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
6
It's called clearing your throat.
– Jim
Oct 7 '13 at 5:27
1
In swedish, we have a single word for it (
harkla), but when translating that it only givesclears his throat(Translate). I don't think there is a word with the same description and a single word but still covering all cases.– Robin Castlin
Oct 7 '13 at 8:50
What's up with 'hawk' as the unmarked word? 'hock' is all I've ever known. Does everyone here have the cot-caught merger? or is it just an eggcorn?
– Mitch
Oct 11 '13 at 0:04
@Mitch Hawk is the original word; your hock is an alteration, cot-caught merger or not.
– Aeon Akechi
Jun 16 '16 at 0:02