ONLY DURING APRIL 2023: If you join our Patreon at the $6 per month tier (or higher), we will draw you as a stick figure and send you a one-of-a-kind mug with your stick figure on it because you are one-of-a-kind! Go to patreon.com/minuteearth
I love the way you included the fact that using the word "bug" colloquially is totally okay. This is exactly the kind of communication we need between the scientific community and the general public. We live in a world where there so much gatekeeping and condescension toward people who don't know something, and it's time to be more inclusive and encouraging.
That's what one aspect of language is - a tool. The general public can use it as they have consensus on, while the *specific* scientific can have it's own definition. However, they need to be aware who they are communicating with and clarify potentially ambiguous/confusing terms as needed. There are times where the specificity of the language is beneficial to adhere to continue on a topic.
Not to mention the fact that it sounds like “bug” was originally in the colloquial language, and was co-opted by the scientific community as a convenient term for a specific subset of species; since the colloquial came first, I am inclined to argue that it is more correct than the entomologists’ interpretation
I read somewhere that the Brits call it a Ladybird, because "bug" is too much like "buggery", which isn't ladylike. I don't know if that's 100% true, but it does sound very puritanical.
I like using "bug" for any small critter of the sort, helps to not say insect incorrectly for spiders and stuff, while using "true bug" for, well, true bugs.
I just use bug for small critters be insects, arachnids, mollusks, and others. Insect for the "true bugs". And the same in Spanish, bicho for small critters and insecto for "true bugs". Before the video I didn't know bugs was a subcategory of insects. I will look if in Spanish too. Edit: Apparently not, bicho is free of confusion.
Same for fish. We tend to say fish, when we also include crab, lobster, shrimp, and eel. We could call it "seafood" but that might be too indicative of these animals being meant for food. And then what about lakefood and riverfood? It's just convenient to factor in other types of animals into a single colloquial word. Just like bugs. The most important point of language, is to get the message across. And by now, everyone roughly knows what a bug is. If you try to be overly correct, you're just making it confusing again, defeating the whole point of using spoken colloquial language.
This last sentence is really important. Informal language is not precise, but very clear! As communicators we should rarely be precise _at the expense of_ being clear. Although many if not most of the times they go hand in hand.
I honestly didn’t know “bug” was an actual category of insect. I just thought it was a colloquial name for insects in general. Thanks for educating me!
As an aspiring biologist, I am really impressed by how you guys are able to elucidate unique and fundamental concepts in simple and captivating ways yet you still maintain perfect scientific accuracy ❤❤❤
With all due respect, many scientists refrain from using fancy vocabulary so as to communicate effectively. One of the most important things in science is communicating our findings to the public, so we use simple words!
They do this in the UK because, in the olden days, people referred to ladybugs as “beetle of our Lady,” so called because Virgin Mary was often depicted as wearing red.
So they might not be bugs or birds but they definitely are ladies. Jokes aside in old times these terms were used differently from today. For example bees were described as being birds while crabs, dolphins, octopus, etc were all fish.
@@davidtitanium22 Which is honestly tiring to hear/read because that factoid is just made to gross people out. There are a whole lot of varieties of shrimp and while some are indeed scavengers, most are generalists and some are filter feeders too. You could say "shrimp are [any arthropod] of the sea" and it would most likely be just as meaningless.
In Polish it's even worse, we use the word "robak" (worm) for any insect (or isopod, etc.) that crawls (rather than flies), or maybe even those that can fly, but are crawling at the moment.
@@EdKolisit did mean an actual worm as well though, it's ultimately from a Proto Indo-European root and is cognate with the Latin "vermis" (worm), where you ultimately get the name of your vermicelli pasta from.
The computer “bug” term came from actually having a moth getting stuck in circuits of computers that filled rooms, so that also tracks for the linguistic development of the word too!
That's actually an urban legend. The word "bug" was used for computer program problems before Grace Hopper found a moth that caused a bug in the system and she joked about the bug being an actual bug. At least this is what I remember from my CS classes, so please do fact check me :)
Not exactly true. The moth in the computer at Harvard in 1947 is often celebrated as the world's first *literal* computer bug, but the use of the term "bug" by engineers to refer to problems with their systems predates it by at least half a century. It's not the source of the term, just an amusing anecdote about a bug being a literal bug, made famous by the correspondence of the already in-use metaphorical term with its literal counterpart.
It's interesting that Carl Linnaeus was mentioned. Carl Linnaeus went twice to England but we do not know how much English he knew. He wrote down almost everything in Latin. . Linnaeus divided the arthropods into three main groups: Insecta (insects), Arachnida (spiders, scorpions, and their relatives), and Crustacea (crabs, lobsters, and their relatives). He subdivided Insecta in 7 orders of which one: Hemiptera. This term was later translated as bugs in English. So while the word "bug" is sometimes used to refer to Hemiptera, it was not a term used by Linnaeus or in his original classification system. So it's not so much Linnaeus himself, but rather the English translators that wanted to connect this Latin term with one used in English.
Thank you. I wanted this clarified, as it was clear to me that something was being misleadingly simplified. It occurred to right away to think: why would Linnaeus, a Swede writing in Latin use the English word "bug?!"
@@rdreher7380 Glad to have helped, the simple answer is: he didn't 😉. But taxology, language and translation is always a mess because the cultural "taxology" often precedes the scientific taxology in combination that different languages/culture have different "taxologies". E.g. A jellyfish is no fish, and a walvis (dutch for whale) is also no vis (fish). And even the scientific taxology changes, therefore it's great that the latin names are scientifically used as a point of reference.
Thank you! This kind of makes the whole premise pointless, as bug was never a scientific definition. My guess is they knew that but chose to ignore it. It's an interesting video nonetheless, but it is misleading...
I think the best way to think of this is as two similar languages: common english and biology english. The language structures are the same, but the word meanings (and even what words are present) may differ Sort of like when an engineer talks about their work to an accountant, they might be asked to speak english afterwards
I wonder if they were really called bugs by Carl Linnaeus, since he was a Swedish Botanist (and a few other things) and would likely have mainly use Latin and Swedish. And the Swedish word for True Bug are nothing like Bug. But it would not surprise me if he also did communicate in English from time to time. Daniel Solander was one of his disciples, and he was instrumental in Cook's famous expedition. Maybe someone else knows more about this than I do?
This is actually a very good point, he wrote mainly in Latin and this problem arose only afterwards when his works were translated into English. I explained this in another comment.
There's no word like bug in Swedish. There's "insekt" for insects (and also arachnids). The genetic word "kryp" (related to creeper) is nonspecific for small animal with many legs.
The "lady" part of ladybug (or ladybird in British English) comes from "Our Lady" (as in Mary, mother of Jesus). This connection with Mary is also found in the German "Marienkäfer" (Mary's beetle) and the Danish "Mariehøne" (Mary's hen). Whereas in both Irish and Russian it's "God's little cow" ("bóín Dé" / "bozhya korovka").
3:07 - IIRC the reason a computer bug is called a bug is back in the early days of vacuum tubes, a literal bug crawled into the machine and caused issues.
The world's smallest bug is a tiny insect called the fairy-fly. Fairy-flies are incredibly small, with some species measuring only 0.2 millimeters in length. These bugs are so small that they are often mistaken for specks of dust or grains of sand. Despite their small size, fairyflies are important predators of other insects and can be found all over the world, living in a variety of habitats including forests, grasslands, and even urban environments. So beware of fairy-flies guys
Sounds like what I learned as “thunder flies” growing up. Extremely tiny specks, look like dirt, but on closer inspection are tiny creatures. One of my family homes had a bunch of them getting stuck in picture frames, behind the glass!
Hey I was just discussing this exact question with someone last week. Now I can share a well researched answer. (We hadn't concluded to anything solid) Looks like the video went in the opposite direction of discussion. We basically agreed we'd use the term bug for insects, arachnids, isopods, myriapods and probably other groups of terrestrial arthropods.
I just use bug as a direct translation of bicho, wich is any kind of critter. In Spanish, the hemiptera aren't called by a normal name. And individual ones like bedbug (ácaro), ladybug (mariquita), stinkbug (chinche) are bug free. So during learning I just stuck using bug as bicho, even if it is incorrect on English. PS: Google translate says bicho is bug.
In Brazil we use the word bicho for small critters, but it is also used as a synonim for animal (written as in English, but with different pronunciation). We have the word percevejo for Hemiptera
Weirdly as a lay person I've had this on my mind way too often all things considered. The problem is that the term "bug" for "small creepy crawly" is just so dang useful. It's inclusive of so much that seemingly "go together", like insects and spiders and isopods, and that I can't think of any better term for. I always just say "true bug" if I mean bug in a scientific sense which works for me, "true bug" and "bug" just being completely different classifications for animals in my mind.
You would really hate the name for ladybug in norwegian. "Marihøne", Mari is based on virgin Mary and høne is a chicken. You also have summer bird (butterfly is "sommerfugl" in norwegian) and probably many other strangely named creatures. Also we generally use the word "bille" for everything crawling on the ground and insect for everything flying around.
The "summerbird" name also exists in Danish and Yiddish, so it probably entered Scandinavia through Low German and originated in some continental German variety... (Swedish has "fjäril", which I think originally might have meant something like "little flutterer", the similarity to "fjäder" (feather) is probably coincidental...)
i (an aspiring entomologist) have this conversation with a friend at least once a week. really neat to know the origin of the word in both a scientific and colloquial sense now!
I think this happens all the time. Examples in medicine include the word "leg" which refers to the segment of the lower extremity between the knee and ankle vs "thigh" above. Kind of a counterpart to "forearm". Most people just use leg to refer to the entire lower extremity, even physicians. "Bug" coloquially is nigh synonymous with insect (as searching in Wikipedia will redirect you there) and 'true bugs' to the Hemiptera order. Just my 2 cents on this, as a physician.
Sometimes the scientific word for an animal group is the same as the colloquial word. In this case, it is not. But isn't that just fine? We also call fish, fish. Even though most fish aren't related to each other at all. It's just convenience. We could call them critters, but I would call small rodents critters as well. Rodents is another one of those words - it's easy and incorrect, but convenient, to also include rabbits. Perhaps because we "use" them as rodents (i.e. small animals kept in a smallish enclosure). And of course the seahorse, while we call it a horse, it isn't a horse by any stretch of the imagination. And there are loads of other animals that have the "wrong" name, either in English or in your own language. In my language, a porcupine litterally translates back to English as "spikey pig", but it isn't a pig. Just goes to show how beautifully colourful language can be, innit.
There’s something to be said about the conflicting goals of being easily understood by normal people and being pedantically correct, and there’s always a tradeoff
In Finland, a ladybug is called a "leppäkerttu" or "läppäpirko", even though it is not bloody and neither is St. Bridget of Sweden, and St. Bridget of Sweden was never bloody and has nothing to do with ladybugs. ( In Finnic languages, "leppä" was the old word for blood alongside world "veri" and in Finland alder is called "leppä" because it is "a tree that bleeds when wounded". )
I think it’s much less common outside the US to call all creepy-crawlies “bugs”. I don’t think most people I’d know would refer to a fly or wasp or dragonfly as a bug, though they might use that term (incorrectly) for beetles.
Bugs are a very specific kind of insect that has sucking mouthparts. Ladybird beetles, on the other hand, are fantastic predators that can mow through a mass of aphids like nobody's business, and that's why farmers love them (and so do I).
I would love a video like this about Berries! So few things called berries are actually berries. But watermelons, cucumbers, squash, and even pumpkins are!
Huh, interesting. In German, colloquial anything creepy crawling gets called "Insekt", even if it isn't. If you translate "bug" to German, most of the time you get "Käfer" (also the other way around), which does refer to Coleoptera, not Hemiptera (which would be "Schnabelkerfe", which isn't a commonly used word). So the ladybug isn't a bug, but (in German) the Marienkäfer is a Käfer... :D Weird. PS: I never ever use "Insekt" for a non-Insekt, and I correct anyone, that does so. Yes, I'm so fun at partys.. 😂
I wanted to write a similar comment. You make some slightly wrong statements in your comment. The word "bug" translates to "Wanze" and the word "beetle" translates to "Käfer". So in german the ladybug (in german: "Marienkäfer" [Käfer = Beetle]) is labeled correctly as a beetle.
@@elnino7153 I mean, I know, that bug would correctly translate to Wanze, or better to Schnabelkerf, but every translator I tried translated it to Käfer or even Insekt. Which one do you use?
@@Nayru... Wiktionary correctly lists "Wanze" as a translation of "bug"; though "Laus" can also be a correct translation, depending on the species (aphids = Blattläuse). I have never encountered anyone who referred to a true bug as a "Käfer". "Insekt" occupies a semi-scientific space, as it is a transaprently latin(ate) word, however without a native equivalent.
I think you're going about this the wrong way. Instead of trying to get 332 million Americans (and more beyond the US who might say "ladybug") to say something different, just get the 35k biologists to ditch the term "bug" as anything within the scientific lexicon. It's Linnaeus's fault, not everyone else's.
All those are bugs to me: Worms, snails, spiders, insects, and pillbugs. Scientists are talking about a subgroup of insects and I’m talking about a variety of small basically unrelated creatures. Love it!
If I'm not wrong, Spanish doesn't have this problem! The generic word for hemipterans is "chinche" (although it isn't really used for some of them, which have their own names, that isn't really an issue). The English "bug", however, would most often be translated as the Spanish "bicho", refering mostly to arthropods, but more generally to any animal (big animals too, although more rarely, and specially if they are weird). A common riddle here in Psain goes as follows: "Por un caminito va caminando un bicho, y el nombre de ese bicho ya te lo he dicho." ("A bicho goes through a small path, and the name of that bicho I have already told you."); solution: vaca (cow).
I think it's mostly the older generations that use ''bicho'' to refer to any non-human animals, among younger generations it's less common to call vertebrates ''bichos'', I usually get confused when older people use that term because I instantly think they're talking about insects.
In Portuguese (at least in Brazil) "bicho" is also used for any animal (we also have the word "animal" with the same meaning as in English and Spanish), but I suspect that the usage only for small critters be more correct or the original use of the word. We have the word "percevejo" for Hemiptera.
I had no idea crustaceans and insects were more closely related to eachother than they were to arachnids. I thought insects and arachnids would be close and then crustaceans would be a completely different part of arthropods.
The word "bug" in the computer world actually has its own very interesting story. A long while ago while computers were mechanical, and at the size of entire rooms, a computer stopped working, and when the engineers went inside to try and fix it, they found a bug stuck in a cog. Removing that bug solved the problem, so they labled that process "debugging". As in, literally removing a bug. This is where a "bug" in the glitch sense got its name
This isn't correct, but rather is an anecdote from the early days of computing ("First actual case of bug being found."). The term "bug" in engineering predates both mechanical and digital computing; Thomas Edison referred to the colloquialism in the 1870's - most famously in a letter from 1878 where he admits it's not a literal insect - and he was not the first to use the term either. More likely the usage was simply was born from the idea of a bug as a small but effective irritant, as software bugs can be small yet irritating too. But the 1947 story is cute.
as a professional entomologist/arachnologist, I can relate so much. Bugs me madly that all sort of arthropods are called bugs. People just don't care. "Creepy crawlies" don't exactly have a big lobby. At least most of them. Except for bees and colourful butterflies maybe. Which I find really sad. The same issue with "fish". Starfish, crayfish, jellyfish... completely different taxonomic groups and none of even are vertebrates. Or "fly" to stay in the insect realm. Butterfly, dragonfly (although I love that name... little flying dragon or what), mayfly... all not flies in the taxonomic sense. And being multilingual, I can tell similar miscallings happen in other languages too. Scutigera coleoptrata (coleoptera being beetles) in english does a fair job: house centipede. In german it is litterally called "woodlouse spider". Yeah, the wood"louse", not a louse but a crustacean (another isopod to be more exact). That apart, the animal is neither an isopod nor a spider, but a centipede....I get that most folks dont have so much specific taxonomic wisdom, and most of all they don't deem it any interesting to improve it. But yes, it BUGS me. As an "arthropod nerd", I thank you very much for this video. It really was quite satisfying to her someone else being bugged by this just like me. And learn so much more about the etymologic base for it. But of course I can accept the random use of the term "bug". I'm not going around trying to "correct" people all the time. I just blend in when with non-entomologists, but I almost have to make an effort to knowingly call these animaly "wrong" for the sake of not annoying non-scientists. Maybe because it turned out that I really do seem to have some neurodivergence going on.
You mean "ladybird" of course! And yes, it's not a bird. :) Here in New Zealand, we use the word "bug" exclusively to describe microbes which can infect you. When you are sick, you say you have "caught a bug" or that you are "very buggy" or "have a bad bug". We do not ever use bug to describe insects of any kind.
I've been doing this backwards my entire life. I didn't even know that "bug" had a scientific definition and thought it was a mere vernacular term for any creepy-crawly thing and was thus the more general term. A half-remembered Bill Nye episode may have been involved.
Fun fact The Mongolian equivalent horhoi can be used for snakes and worms which leads to the death worm which is actually a basalisk like snake originally
The term bug for computers come from electrical problems when a bug got electrocuted and shorted a circuit. A bug in "software" was often caused by a real bug in the circuit.
In Australia, we call them either ladybirds or ladybeetles, depending on which part of the country you're from. I'd never heard the term ladybug till A Bug's Life came out.
This echoes a previous video on types of trees, where scientists categorize trees into hardwood and softwood based on their genetics with no regard to their actual hardness or softness. This is overloading a common term to refer to something specific and then getting upset when people use the term in its original meaning. This is legitimately the first time I heard of bugs being a sub-category of insects rather than the other way around.
Technical language frequently needs to be different not only from colloquial language, but even from technical language in other fields. This something to be aware of, but not bothered by.
I like to keep technical taxonomy separate from casual conversation. Flies might not scientifically be bugs, but if a kid asks me what a fly is, I'll say 'a type of bug.'
Using the word “bug” to describe a glitch originated when a small moth flew into a computer and caused an error. The moth was removed (debugged) and the program produced the expected output. Keep in mind that computers at this time were really large and a moth could easily fly into one.
I was confused for a second because where I am they are called Ladybirds, not bugs at all. We still absolutely use bug generally like in the rest of this video though, I just found that part amusing.
Pedantry around the word "bug" bothers me just as much as so-called "incorrect" usage of it apparently bothers other people. If you want to talk about order Hemiptera, you should say "true bug" or "hemipteran" for clarity. You can't expect us to give up our wonderful monosyllabic umbrella term for all kinds of creepy crawlies just because one 18th century Swedish man said so.
“Bug” in the colloquial sense is a very useful term, allowing folks to talk about terrestrial invertebrates without misapplying the term “insect”. So a ladybug can be a “bug”, but not a “true bug”. Or we can just rename “true bugs” something else so scientists don’t have to have this dilemma.
I have never once had someone say "bug" and mean "insect". Everyone uses it to mean "creepy crawly little guy" which includes worms, spiders, slugs, etc.
In general though, you’re not going to walk up to a worm and call it a bug. You’d call it a worm. You’d also call a snail a snail, not a bug. We call insects bugs either because it has less syllables or simply because the word bug preceded insects.
In the UK, we call them labybirds (of course, they aren't birds either!) and pill bug is pill louse to distinguish it from a woodlouse, not sure louse is much better either! I also prefer minibeasts to creepy crawlies as it is a more positive term.
Ah interesting. Reminds me of the "berry" conundrum. Honestly in English a lot of things are like that which makes it really confusing for a non-native speaker.
The origin of the term "bug" in computers dates back to the early days of computing when a moth was found trapped in a relay, causing the system to malfunction. Since then, the term has evolved and is now used to describe any issue that causes a program to behave incorrectly or produce unintended results. Also term debugging was fairly literal in early days.
the fact of the matter is using the word bug in a scientific context was a bad idea from the jump. it should be changed, much like how “bc and ad” turned into “bce and ce”.
The "mechanical glitch" use of the word "bug" doesn't come form it being haunting, but from the first computer bug - the 1947 moth that caused an issue in a computer hardware. It's just a weird word that caught on in the computer space, like sharding (that came from Ultima Online), etc.
The word "bug" for computer problems came from an event in 1946 where a computer problem was caused by a moth crawling into a relay. Since then, the word has stuck around.
As in the UK and India, in Australia they are called ladybirds. Maybe just to confuse children. Either way I still use them in my apps as an icon to report a bug because they pretty 🐞
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
ONLY DURING APRIL 2023: If you join our Patreon at the $6 per month tier (or higher), we will draw you as a stick figure and send you a one-of-a-kind mug with your stick figure on it because you are one-of-a-kind! Go to patreon.com/minuteearth
Lol
I live in the UK, can I still get the mug?
International Shipping? Bcs count me in then!
pls answer about international shipping! many of us are interested but unsure
@@coralmaynard4876 yes, we can ship internationally! :)
It's not a bug. It's a feature!
ladyfeature
- bethesda
Same
@@oldcowbb ...if you know what I mean.
Ah I know this comment is going to get thousands of likes!
I love the way you included the fact that using the word "bug" colloquially is totally okay. This is exactly the kind of communication we need between the scientific community and the general public. We live in a world where there so much gatekeeping and condescension toward people who don't know something, and it's time to be more inclusive and encouraging.
^^^
+
Science needs _far_ _less_ "aCkKkTuAaLLyyYy" folks then it currently has.
That's what one aspect of language is - a tool. The general public can use it as they have consensus on, while the *specific* scientific can have it's own definition. However, they need to be aware who they are communicating with and clarify potentially ambiguous/confusing terms as needed. There are times where the specificity of the language is beneficial to adhere to continue on a topic.
Not to mention the fact that it sounds like “bug” was originally in the colloquial language, and was co-opted by the scientific community as a convenient term for a specific subset of species; since the colloquial came first, I am inclined to argue that it is more correct than the entomologists’ interpretation
I'm from the UK and I know it's not a bug. It's some kind of bird
Haha ladybird
Mariehøne (Marie hen)
I read somewhere that the Brits call it a Ladybird, because "bug" is too much like "buggery", which isn't ladylike. I don't know if that's 100% true, but it does sound very puritanical.
@@BrotherAlpha I don't think so. It's to do with bird of Mary or something?
Pillbugs too! Woodlice to us in the UK
I like using "bug" for any small critter of the sort, helps to not say insect incorrectly for spiders and stuff, while using "true bug" for, well, true bugs.
Why not use the word _thing_ for any old thing, just so you don’t have to bother getting the word right? 😂
@@BillySugger1965 Perhaps because most people are neither entomologists nor pedantic jerks
I do the same thing
I just use bug for small critters be insects, arachnids, mollusks, and others. Insect for the "true bugs".
And the same in Spanish, bicho for small critters and insecto for "true bugs".
Before the video I didn't know bugs was a subcategory of insects.
I will look if in Spanish too.
Edit: Apparently not, bicho is free of confusion.
Same for fish. We tend to say fish, when we also include crab, lobster, shrimp, and eel. We could call it "seafood" but that might be too indicative of these animals being meant for food. And then what about lakefood and riverfood? It's just convenient to factor in other types of animals into a single colloquial word. Just like bugs.
The most important point of language, is to get the message across. And by now, everyone roughly knows what a bug is. If you try to be overly correct, you're just making it confusing again, defeating the whole point of using spoken colloquial language.
This last sentence is really important. Informal language is not precise, but very clear! As communicators we should rarely be precise _at the expense of_ being clear. Although many if not most of the times they go hand in hand.
This is my first time actually hearing that bug is an actual scientific term. I always thought it was just a slang term for all little invertebrates.
Same situation here. In fact I always thought that bug was a broad term that included all insects instead of a subtype of insects.
Le bugge
The scientist should really come up with their own name and stop stealing our words!!
Those scientards believe they own the language(s).
@@firewoodloki They have their own name, "hemiptera", they should stick to it and leave the common words for everyday conversation.
I honestly didn’t know “bug” was an actual category of insect. I just thought it was a colloquial name for insects in general. Thanks for educating me!
Recently learned that one of my colleague is an insectophile...
I'm shocked really, never seemed like a guy who would bed bugs.
Booooo
Stfu this is the best joke in the world
That's... bugging crazy...
That's some nasty buggery going on there.
As an aspiring biologist, I am really impressed by how you guys are able to elucidate unique and fundamental concepts in simple and captivating ways yet you still maintain perfect scientific accuracy ❤❤❤
elucidate?
@@Octochiken synonymous with explain/describe
With all due respect, many scientists refrain from using fancy vocabulary so as to communicate effectively. One of the most important things in science is communicating our findings to the public, so we use simple words!
@@jwinthepro I'm just saying there's no need to overcomplicate your sentences.
@@Octochiken i agree
in the uk we call "ladybugs" ladybirds, which is even odder!
They do this in the UK because, in the olden days, people referred to ladybugs as “beetle of our Lady,” so called because Virgin Mary was often depicted as wearing red.
So they might not be bugs or birds but they definitely are ladies. Jokes aside in old times these terms were used differently from today. For example bees were described as being birds while crabs, dolphins, octopus, etc were all fish.
I always say that the popular use of the word "bug" basically means arthropod and am happy to call crabs ocean bugs
And shrimps are ocean cockroach
@@davidtitanium22 Which is honestly tiring to hear/read because that factoid is just made to gross people out. There are a whole lot of varieties of shrimp and while some are indeed scavengers, most are generalists and some are filter feeders too.
You could say "shrimp are [any arthropod] of the sea" and it would most likely be just as meaningless.
@@mk_rexx and it's funny because it is meaningless
Crabs are not only to be found in oceans
It is more about the fact that insects are a subgroup of crustaceans. A lobster is closely related to a butterfly than to a horseshoe crab.
Intersting vid on both etymology and entomology! People often confuse the two, which bugs me in ways I can't put into words.
I love that joke.
In Polish it's even worse, we use the word "robak" (worm) for any insect (or isopod, etc.) that crawls (rather than flies), or maybe even those that can fly, but are crawling at the moment.
Meanwhile back in English land, "wyrm" means dragon and not an actual worm...
@@EdKolisit did mean an actual worm as well though, it's ultimately from a Proto Indo-European root and is cognate with the Latin "vermis" (worm), where you ultimately get the name of your vermicelli pasta from.
@@viamedia2704 mmm, worms! How to eat fried worms, though?
The computer “bug” term came from actually having a moth getting stuck in circuits of computers that filled rooms, so that also tracks for the linguistic development of the word too!
Thank you. That is the only interesting thing about this video.
Ok I didn't know this. Some words are just used very frequently, but never questioned; just accepted. Thanks for the interesting comment!
That's actually an urban legend. The word "bug" was used for computer program problems before Grace Hopper found a moth that caused a bug in the system and she joked about the bug being an actual bug. At least this is what I remember from my CS classes, so please do fact check me :)
Not exactly true. The moth in the computer at Harvard in 1947 is often celebrated as the world's first *literal* computer bug, but the use of the term "bug" by engineers to refer to problems with their systems predates it by at least half a century. It's not the source of the term, just an amusing anecdote about a bug being a literal bug, made famous by the correspondence of the already in-use metaphorical term with its literal counterpart.
@@spartan0x75 interesting that her name was Hopper.
It's interesting that Carl Linnaeus was mentioned. Carl Linnaeus went twice to England but we do not know how much English he knew. He wrote down almost everything in Latin. .
Linnaeus divided the arthropods into three main groups: Insecta (insects), Arachnida (spiders, scorpions, and their relatives), and Crustacea (crabs, lobsters, and their relatives).
He subdivided Insecta in 7 orders of which one: Hemiptera.
This term was later translated as bugs in English.
So while the word "bug" is sometimes used to refer to Hemiptera, it was not a term used by Linnaeus or in his original classification system.
So it's not so much Linnaeus himself, but rather the English translators that wanted to connect this Latin term with one used in English.
Thank you. I wanted this clarified, as it was clear to me that something was being misleadingly simplified. It occurred to right away to think: why would Linnaeus, a Swede writing in Latin use the English word "bug?!"
@@rdreher7380 Glad to have helped, the simple answer is: he didn't 😉.
But taxology, language and translation is always a mess because the cultural "taxology" often precedes the scientific taxology in combination that different languages/culture have different "taxologies". E.g. A jellyfish is no fish, and a walvis (dutch for whale) is also no vis (fish). And even the scientific taxology changes, therefore it's great that the latin names are scientifically used as a point of reference.
Thank you! This kind of makes the whole premise pointless, as bug was never a scientific definition. My guess is they knew that but chose to ignore it. It's an interesting video nonetheless, but it is misleading...
I didn’t know you called them ladybugs
We call them ladybirds in the UK
Came here to say this. If someone doesn't like 'ladybug', they're definitely not going to like the word 'ladybird'
Which is surely even less accurate :P
I call them ladybeetles.
It's
@@greentoad-g8k small red cow in mine
I think the best way to think of this is as two similar languages: common english and biology english. The language structures are the same, but the word meanings (and even what words are present) may differ
Sort of like when an engineer talks about their work to an accountant, they might be asked to speak english afterwards
The accountant measures work in manhours.
The engineer measures work in watthours.
It s a classic case of jargon
Pill bugs? I believe you mean roly poly
Roly poly? I believe you mean Rolie Polie Olie
Yes
Potato bug!
Is that like a woodlouse?
Yes
I'd definitely just call them "features". As for the specific beetle, that's a "ladybird" to me!
And yet, it's not a bird, so it's even wierder...
I wonder if they were really called bugs by Carl Linnaeus, since he was a Swedish Botanist (and a few other things) and would likely have mainly use Latin and Swedish. And the Swedish word for True Bug are nothing like Bug. But it would not surprise me if he also did communicate in English from time to time. Daniel Solander was one of his disciples, and he was instrumental in Cook's famous expedition. Maybe someone else knows more about this than I do?
This is actually a very good point, he wrote mainly in Latin and this problem arose only afterwards when his works were translated into English. I explained this in another comment.
There's no word like bug in Swedish. There's "insekt" for insects (and also arachnids). The genetic word "kryp" (related to creeper) is nonspecific for small animal with many legs.
We call them Ladybirds or the Ladybird Beetle in India. I love the black dots on the red shell, feels like a miniature painting ❤
In the UK we call them Ladybirds. I don't know if this helps or not.
The "lady" part of ladybug (or ladybird in British English) comes from "Our Lady" (as in Mary, mother of Jesus).
This connection with Mary is also found in the German "Marienkäfer" (Mary's beetle) and the Danish "Mariehøne" (Mary's hen).
Whereas in both Irish and Russian it's "God's little cow" ("bóín Dé" / "bozhya korovka").
In Spanish is "mariquita", and I think it originally also made reference to the Vingin Mary, although in modern slang it has come to mean "sissy-boy".
Joaninha (little/small Joana) in Portuguese, at least in Brazilian Portuguese
I never thought of the word "bug" as a scientific term. I always saw it as it is typically used - a generalized word for multilegged critter.
Even then most entomologists just refer to true bugs as Hemipterans, so it’s still not that scientific
0:30 Nope. I refuse to accept that. A bug in the colloquial sense is any type of creepy-crawly. Which includes pill bugs and spiders.
Thanks for supplying me more ammunition for when I'm declaring "ladybird" as the correct word.
3:07 - IIRC the reason a computer bug is called a bug is back in the early days of vacuum tubes, a literal bug crawled into the machine and caused issues.
The world's smallest bug is a tiny insect called the fairy-fly. Fairy-flies are incredibly small, with some species measuring only 0.2 millimeters in length. These bugs are so small that they are often mistaken for specks of dust or grains of sand. Despite their small size, fairyflies are important predators of other insects and can be found all over the world, living in a variety of habitats including forests, grasslands, and even urban environments. So beware of fairy-flies guys
Ironically enough, they technically aren’t flies! The same applies to fireflies and lightning bugs 😂
@@jwintheprofireflies and lightning bugs are different?
@@sirk603 no, they’re the same thing. But they are neither flies nor bugs. They are beetles, of family Lampyridae
Sounds like what I learned as “thunder flies” growing up. Extremely tiny specks, look like dirt, but on closer inspection are tiny creatures. One of my family homes had a bunch of them getting stuck in picture frames, behind the glass!
@@kaitlyn__L Those are actually thrips, a close relative of true bugs! Fairy flies are a type of parasitoid wasp.
Hey I was just discussing this exact question with someone last week. Now I can share a well researched answer. (We hadn't concluded to anything solid)
Looks like the video went in the opposite direction of discussion. We basically agreed we'd use the term bug for insects, arachnids, isopods, myriapods and probably other groups of terrestrial arthropods.
I just use bug as a direct translation of bicho, wich is any kind of critter.
In Spanish, the hemiptera aren't called by a normal name. And individual ones like bedbug (ácaro), ladybug (mariquita), stinkbug (chinche) are bug free.
So during learning I just stuck using bug as bicho, even if it is incorrect on English.
PS: Google translate says bicho is bug.
In Brazil we use the word bicho for small critters, but it is also used as a synonim for animal (written as in English, but with different pronunciation). We have the word percevejo for Hemiptera
Weirdly as a lay person I've had this on my mind way too often all things considered. The problem is that the term "bug" for "small creepy crawly" is just so dang useful. It's inclusive of so much that seemingly "go together", like insects and spiders and isopods, and that I can't think of any better term for. I always just say "true bug" if I mean bug in a scientific sense which works for me, "true bug" and "bug" just being completely different classifications for animals in my mind.
"A part of me wants to call it a ladybug, but it's not."
Large parts of the world: "That's cause it's a BIRD!"
They really committed "Entomological Etymology". I love this channel.
You would really hate the name for ladybug in norwegian. "Marihøne", Mari is based on virgin Mary and høne is a chicken. You also have summer bird (butterfly is "sommerfugl" in norwegian) and probably many other strangely named creatures. Also we generally use the word "bille" for everything crawling on the ground and insect for everything flying around.
The "summerbird" name also exists in Danish and Yiddish, so it probably entered Scandinavia through Low German and originated in some continental German variety... (Swedish has "fjäril", which I think originally might have meant something like "little flutterer", the similarity to "fjäder" (feather) is probably coincidental...)
how do i pronounce any of this?
i (an aspiring entomologist) have this conversation with a friend at least once a week. really neat to know the origin of the word in both a scientific and colloquial sense now!
I need to clarify that the ones in Britain we call Ladybirds are the ones that are red with black spots and have wings folded under a hard shell
Just like the one in your picture thumbnail
Exactly the same ones that are called "ladybugs" in American English.
The day I recognized language as a living, changing thing, and acknowledged that common names don’t need to make sense is the day I became happy
I think this happens all the time. Examples in medicine include the word "leg" which refers to the segment of the lower extremity between the knee and ankle vs "thigh" above. Kind of a counterpart to "forearm". Most people just use leg to refer to the entire lower extremity, even physicians.
"Bug" coloquially is nigh synonymous with insect (as searching in Wikipedia will redirect you there) and 'true bugs' to the Hemiptera order. Just my 2 cents on this, as a physician.
I have been waiting my entire life for “entomological etymology” to be used in a real sentence. THANK YOU!! 🥰😘❤
Sometimes the scientific word for an animal group is the same as the colloquial word. In this case, it is not. But isn't that just fine? We also call fish, fish. Even though most fish aren't related to each other at all. It's just convenience.
We could call them critters, but I would call small rodents critters as well. Rodents is another one of those words - it's easy and incorrect, but convenient, to also include rabbits. Perhaps because we "use" them as rodents (i.e. small animals kept in a smallish enclosure).
And of course the seahorse, while we call it a horse, it isn't a horse by any stretch of the imagination. And there are loads of other animals that have the "wrong" name, either in English or in your own language. In my language, a porcupine litterally translates back to English as "spikey pig", but it isn't a pig.
Just goes to show how beautifully colourful language can be, innit.
There’s something to be said about the conflicting goals of being easily understood by normal people and being pedantically correct, and there’s always a tradeoff
In Finland, a ladybug is called a "leppäkerttu" or "läppäpirko", even though it is not bloody and neither is St. Bridget of Sweden, and St. Bridget of Sweden was never bloody and has nothing to do with ladybugs.
( In Finnic languages, "leppä" was the old word for blood alongside world "veri" and in Finland alder is called "leppä" because it is "a tree that bleeds when wounded". )
I think it’s much less common outside the US to call all creepy-crawlies “bugs”. I don’t think most people I’d know would refer to a fly or wasp or dragonfly as a bug, though they might use that term (incorrectly) for beetles.
Is that meaning of the word 'bug' limited to American and Canadian English?
Bugs are a very specific kind of insect that has sucking mouthparts. Ladybird beetles, on the other hand, are fantastic predators that can mow through a mass of aphids like nobody's business, and that's why farmers love them (and so do I).
I would love a video like this about Berries!
So few things called berries are actually berries. But watermelons, cucumbers, squash, and even pumpkins are!
The fact some people don't know the difference between entomology and etymology bugs me in a way I can't put into words.
Huh, interesting. In German, colloquial anything creepy crawling gets called "Insekt", even if it isn't.
If you translate "bug" to German, most of the time you get "Käfer" (also the other way around), which does refer to Coleoptera, not Hemiptera (which would be "Schnabelkerfe", which isn't a commonly used word). So the ladybug isn't a bug, but (in German) the Marienkäfer is a Käfer... :D Weird.
PS: I never ever use "Insekt" for a non-Insekt, and I correct anyone, that does so. Yes, I'm so fun at partys.. 😂
I wanted to write a similar comment. You make some slightly wrong statements in your comment. The word "bug" translates to "Wanze" and the word "beetle" translates to "Käfer". So in german the ladybug (in german: "Marienkäfer" [Käfer = Beetle]) is labeled correctly as a beetle.
@@elnino7153 I mean, I know, that bug would correctly translate to Wanze, or better to Schnabelkerf, but every translator I tried translated it to Käfer or even Insekt. Which one do you use?
@@Nayru... Wiktionary correctly lists "Wanze" as a translation of "bug"; though "Laus" can also be a correct translation, depending on the species (aphids = Blattläuse). I have never encountered anyone who referred to a true bug as a "Käfer".
"Insekt" occupies a semi-scientific space, as it is a transaprently latin(ate) word, however without a native equivalent.
3:23 i like how you can hear the restraint.
I think you're going about this the wrong way. Instead of trying to get 332 million Americans (and more beyond the US who might say "ladybug") to say something different, just get the 35k biologists to ditch the term "bug" as anything within the scientific lexicon. It's Linnaeus's fault, not everyone else's.
All those are bugs to me: Worms, snails, spiders, insects, and pillbugs. Scientists are talking about a subgroup of insects and I’m talking about a variety of small basically unrelated creatures. Love it!
It may not be a bug, but it’s definitely not a bird.
And yet, is it not airborne by its own accord, like the birdes are of theirs?
If I'm not wrong, Spanish doesn't have this problem! The generic word for hemipterans is "chinche" (although it isn't really used for some of them, which have their own names, that isn't really an issue). The English "bug", however, would most often be translated as the Spanish "bicho", refering mostly to arthropods, but more generally to any animal (big animals too, although more rarely, and specially if they are weird).
A common riddle here in Psain goes as follows: "Por un caminito va caminando un bicho, y el nombre de ese bicho ya te lo he dicho." ("A bicho goes through a small path, and the name of that bicho I have already told you."); solution: vaca (cow).
I think it's mostly the older generations that use ''bicho'' to refer to any non-human animals, among younger generations it's less common to call vertebrates ''bichos'', I usually get confused when older people use that term because I instantly think they're talking about insects.
In Portuguese (at least in Brazil) "bicho" is also used for any animal (we also have the word "animal" with the same meaning as in English and Spanish), but I suspect that the usage only for small critters be more correct or the original use of the word. We have the word "percevejo" for Hemiptera.
I love watching your videos, you still give informative videos, like he one about orchids that you published years ago.
I had no idea crustaceans and insects were more closely related to eachother than they were to arachnids. I thought insects and arachnids would be close and then crustaceans would be a completely different part of arthropods.
Excuse you, computer glitches are called "bugs" because one of the first glitches was caused by a moth getting trapped in a relay.
Bar challenge: Take a sip each time he says bug
The word "bug" in the computer world actually has its own very interesting story.
A long while ago while computers were mechanical, and at the size of entire rooms, a computer stopped working, and when the engineers went inside to try and fix it, they found a bug stuck in a cog. Removing that bug solved the problem, so they labled that process "debugging". As in, literally removing a bug. This is where a "bug" in the glitch sense got its name
*The more you know*
✨✨✨✨✨✨💫
This isn't correct, but rather is an anecdote from the early days of computing ("First actual case of bug being found."). The term "bug" in engineering predates both mechanical and digital computing; Thomas Edison referred to the colloquialism in the 1870's - most famously in a letter from 1878 where he admits it's not a literal insect - and he was not the first to use the term either.
More likely the usage was simply was born from the idea of a bug as a small but effective irritant, as software bugs can be small yet irritating too. But the 1947 story is cute.
can't believe you got through this full video without sneaking in a Pokemon reference
I remember when Minute meant one minute. This video could have been one minute without any loss of content.
I guess their overly verbose presentation *bugs* you, eh?
as a professional entomologist/arachnologist, I can relate so much. Bugs me madly that all sort of arthropods are called bugs.
People just don't care. "Creepy crawlies" don't exactly have a big lobby. At least most of them. Except for bees and colourful butterflies maybe. Which I find really sad.
The same issue with "fish". Starfish, crayfish, jellyfish... completely different taxonomic groups and none of even are vertebrates. Or "fly" to stay in the insect realm. Butterfly, dragonfly (although I love that name... little flying dragon or what), mayfly... all not flies in the taxonomic sense.
And being multilingual, I can tell similar miscallings happen in other languages too.
Scutigera coleoptrata (coleoptera being beetles) in english does a fair job: house centipede. In german it is litterally called "woodlouse spider". Yeah, the wood"louse", not a louse but a crustacean (another isopod to be more exact). That apart, the animal is neither an isopod nor a spider, but a centipede....I get that most folks dont have so much specific taxonomic wisdom, and most of all they don't deem it any interesting to improve it.
But yes, it BUGS me.
As an "arthropod nerd", I thank you very much for this video. It really was quite satisfying to her someone else being bugged by this just like me.
And learn so much more about the etymologic base for it.
But of course I can accept the random use of the term "bug". I'm not going around trying to "correct" people all the time. I just blend in when with non-entomologists, but I almost have to make an effort to knowingly call these animaly "wrong" for the sake of not annoying non-scientists. Maybe because it turned out that I really do seem to have some neurodivergence going on.
now do one for germs
You mean "ladybird" of course!
And yes, it's not a bird. :)
Here in New Zealand, we use the word "bug" exclusively to describe microbes which can infect you. When you are sick, you say you have "caught a bug" or that you are "very buggy" or "have a bad bug". We do not ever use bug to describe insects of any kind.
…it’s a feature.
I've been doing this backwards my entire life. I didn't even know that "bug" had a scientific definition and thought it was a mere vernacular term for any creepy-crawly thing and was thus the more general term.
A half-remembered Bill Nye episode may have been involved.
This is not a lady too..
Fun fact The Mongolian equivalent horhoi can be used for snakes and worms which leads to the death worm which is actually a basalisk like snake originally
The term bug for computers come from electrical problems when a bug got electrocuted and shorted a circuit. A bug in "software" was often caused by a real bug in the circuit.
In Australia, we call them either ladybirds or ladybeetles, depending on which part of the country you're from. I'd never heard the term ladybug till A Bug's Life came out.
This echoes a previous video on types of trees, where scientists categorize trees into hardwood and softwood based on their genetics with no regard to their actual hardness or softness. This is overloading a common term to refer to something specific and then getting upset when people use the term in its original meaning.
This is legitimately the first time I heard of bugs being a sub-category of insects rather than the other way around.
I always use "bug" for all small exoskeleton having creatures, including spiders and centipedes, while "insecect" is only for the.. well.. insects.
Technical language frequently needs to be different not only from colloquial language, but even from technical language in other fields.
This something to be aware of, but not bothered by.
Some bug-types in Pokémon: lol
bug: *keeps being misused entemology*
fly: *nervous sweating*
I like to keep technical taxonomy separate from casual conversation. Flies might not scientifically be bugs, but if a kid asks me what a fly is, I'll say 'a type of bug.'
Makes me think of words like “hack” or “electrocute”.
Even dictionaries now use the common, but technically incorrect definition.
Using the word “bug” to describe a glitch originated when a small moth flew into a computer and caused an error. The moth was removed (debugged) and the program produced the expected output. Keep in mind that computers at this time were really large and a moth could easily fly into one.
I was confused for a second because where I am they are called Ladybirds, not bugs at all. We still absolutely use bug generally like in the rest of this video though, I just found that part amusing.
I always thought a bug was a childish name for an insect and not a scientific category.
Pedantry around the word "bug" bothers me just as much as so-called "incorrect" usage of it apparently bothers other people. If you want to talk about order Hemiptera, you should say "true bug" or "hemipteran" for clarity. You can't expect us to give up our wonderful monosyllabic umbrella term for all kinds of creepy crawlies just because one 18th century Swedish man said so.
"Had wings at one point in their life"
*sad silverfish noises
“Bug” in the colloquial sense is a very useful term, allowing folks to talk about terrestrial invertebrates without misapplying the term “insect”. So a ladybug can be a “bug”, but not a “true bug”. Or we can just rename “true bugs” something else so scientists don’t have to have this dilemma.
“Ladybug is clearly misleading. LadyBIRD is more taxonomically appropriate.” -some scientist probably
Bug is simply the best word for small creepy crawlies, so naturally it took over as the common nomenclature.
Did not know bug was a technical term at all. I've generally use 'bug' when I can't be sure the creature is an insect.
I have never once had someone say "bug" and mean "insect". Everyone uses it to mean "creepy crawly little guy" which includes worms, spiders, slugs, etc.
In general though, you’re not going to walk up to a worm and call it a bug. You’d call it a worm. You’d also call a snail a snail, not a bug. We call insects bugs either because it has less syllables or simply because the word bug preceded insects.
In the UK, we call them labybirds (of course, they aren't birds either!) and pill bug is pill louse to distinguish it from a woodlouse, not sure louse is much better either! I also prefer minibeasts to creepy crawlies as it is a more positive term.
The history of the word bug just reinforces my belief that, in common English, it is entirely fair to call a spider a bug
I saw the thumbnail and I was drawn to wanting to know more. Now that I know more I will do join mobile infantry to see what other bugs I can find.
Ah interesting. Reminds me of the "berry" conundrum. Honestly in English a lot of things are like that which makes it really confusing for a non-native speaker.
The origin of the term "bug" in computers dates back to the early days of computing when a moth was found trapped in a relay, causing the system to malfunction. Since then, the term has evolved and is now used to describe any issue that causes a program to behave incorrectly or produce unintended results.
Also term debugging was fairly literal in early days.
ah the old problem of colloquial terms versus taxonomic terms. like how a lot of fruits with berry in their name aren't berries, but pumpkins are.
In nonspecific country we are calling ladybug Sunshinebug or Seven-dotsbug
Mum: You found the bug yet? Jimmy?
Scientist: Yeah, I do, but I dont.
the fact of the matter is using the word bug in a scientific context was a bad idea from the jump. it should be changed, much like how “bc and ad” turned into “bce and ce”.
The "mechanical glitch" use of the word "bug" doesn't come form it being haunting, but from the first computer bug - the 1947 moth that caused an issue in a computer hardware. It's just a weird word that caught on in the computer space, like sharding (that came from Ultima Online), etc.
Entomologists doing etymology! I love it!
I didn't know bug had a technological definition, I thought it was just a general word for small critters, especially arthropods.
I had no idea that the word "bug" was that important. Thank you for the clarification.
The word "bug" for computer problems came from an event in 1946 where a computer problem was caused by a moth crawling into a relay. Since then, the word has stuck around.
As in the UK and India, in Australia they are called ladybirds. Maybe just to confuse children. Either way I still use them in my apps as an icon to report a bug because they pretty 🐞