• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

When a bug is not a bug

madurobob

Philosopher
madurobob
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
7,401
Location
Blue Heaven
Springtime in North Carolina means bugs, and lots of them. right now we're getting an extra dose because the 13 year cicadas are doing their above-ground thing - amazing numbers and noise level!

But, this isn't about cicadas really. Over the weekend I cleared out an overgrown flower bed to get it ready for some fresh annuals. On Sunday night I realized I had quite a few chigger bites - dozens all over, from head to toe. A friend, still believing the old myth, told me they weren't chigger bites, but actual chiggers burrowing under my skin. I enlightened her on the reality of chiggers.

Part of this enlightenment involved, of course, The Internet. One of the first links for a google search on "chiggers" was this Missouri Department of Conservation website that said:
Myths about chiggers are widespread. Many believe chiggers are some type of bug. Folklore tells us they burrow under our skin and die, that they drink our blood and that they can best be killed by suffocation with nail polish or bathing with bleach, alcohol, turpentine or salt water. Surprisingly, all these popular facts are just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

I was surprised. Really, all of them? Yup, the very next paragraph clearly states that "chiggers are not bugs". They are a form of mite related to ticks; arachnids.

I was.. chagrined. I have been calling spiders, ticks and chiggers "bugs" for nearly 50 years. I assumed "bug" was a generic non-scientific term for just about any small creepy crawly critter.

Was I wrong? Is there really an official and scientific definition of "bug" that excludes arachnids?
 
"Bug" normally means insects, but it doesn't have a precise scientific definition. Insects and arachnids are normally mentioned separately. Since chiggers are in the same family as spiders, it would make sense to list them separately. Since they are tiny annoying things, it also makes sense to call them bugs. Just don't call them insects.
 
Well bugs mostly relates to insects .. which arachnids are not. But it's just like saying mass instead of weight .. with some audiences it wont be a problem, then again, with some, it might be.
 
Technically, bug only refers to insects from the order hemiptera (true bugs), but in common use can refer to any "creepy-crawlie" or "beastie".

ETA: I've just been doing some entomological etymology (!) and the word bug comes from a word generally meaning "something scary" - and is related to words such as bogeyman and bugaboo. It became used to cover all insects, or creepy-crawlies and then scientists took the word and used it to refer to something more specific. It annoys me somewhat when science co-opts a word in common usage and then tries to impose the new scientific usage onto the general use.
 
Last edited:
madurobb,

I'm with you. Anything smaller than my hand, with more than 4 legs and more than 2 eyes is a bug.
 
All the little crawlies are bugs, including arachnids and insects. It's a colloquial term for invertebrate vermin.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
Technically, bug only refers to insects from the order hemiptera (true bugs), but in common use can refer to any "creepy-crawlie" or "beastie".

ETA: I've just been doing some entomological etymology (!) and the word bug comes from a word generally meaning "something scary" - and is related to words such as bogeyman and bugaboo. It became used to cover all insects, or creepy-crawlies and then scientists took the word and used it to refer to something more specific. It annoys me somewhat when science co-opts a word in common usage and then tries to impose the new scientific usage onto the general use.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it bugs me, too.
 
I guess what bugs me (ha!) is the obvious equivocation on the Missouri website. First they say "many believe chiggers are some type of bug" then they say "chiggers are not bugs". But, the first use of "bug" is clearly meant to be the colloquial term meaning nearly any creepy-crawly while the second use is a reference to hemiptera (true bugs) as Prof Yaffle points out. They had to change the working definition of "bug" mid stride in order to make the second statement.

A chigger is a bug, just not a True Bug like the bazillions of cicadas that have been serenading me for the past 10 days. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that a majority of the bugs on earth are not True Bugs.
 
madurobob said:
But, the first use of "bug" is clearly meant to be the colloquial term meaning nearly any creepy-crawly while the second use is a reference to hemiptera (true bugs) as Prof Yaffle points out.
Click to expand...


How do you get that?

The article says: "Many believe chiggers are some type of bug... Chiggers are not bugs or any other type of insect."

Sounds to me like they are being consistent in the use of the word.
 
Last edited:
AdMan said:
How do you get that?
Click to expand...

See the quote from their website:
Myths about chiggers are widespread. Many believe chiggers are some type of bug. Folklore tells us they burrow under our skin and die, that they drink our blood and that they can best be killed by suffocation with nail polish or bathing with bleach, alcohol, turpentine or salt water. Surprisingly, all these popular facts are just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

They are talking about commonly held misconceptions about chiggers. The common definition of "bug" is any creepy-crawly. The common definition of bug is not "members of the order hemiptera".
 
AdMan said:
How do you get that?

The article says: "Many believe chiggers are some type of bug... Chiggers are not bugs or any other type of insect."

Sounds to me like they are being consistent in the use of the word.
Click to expand...

Except that when "many believe....", I'm sure when questioned, the majority will be using the colloquial definition, not the scientific definition. Most will not even be aware of what the scientific definition is.

Its like when someone calls a strawberry a fruit, and a scientist corrects them and says, actually, a strawberry is not a fruit as it has the seeds on the outside. But science co-opted the word fruit and gave it a much more limited definition than the colloquial one - then s/he insisst we are wrong to keep using it in the original sense.

Yes - it bugs me!
 
Last edited:
madurobob said:
See the quote from their website:


They are talking about commonly held misconceptions about chiggers. The common definition of "bug" is any creepy-crawly. The common definition of bug is not "members of the order hemiptera".
Click to expand...


I think in the author's mind they were using "bug" consistently, but I can see why reading that might be confusing to many.
 
AdMan said:
I think in the author's mind they were using "bug" consistently, but I can see why reading that might be confusing to many.
Click to expand...

If they were using it consistently to mean the scientific term, then they were just plain wrong to say that most people think chiggers are bugs.
 
The colloquialism 'bug' refers to any small terrestrial invertebrate.

I think actual bugs are insects that don't metamorphose, like crickets.
 
I think I'll start a campaign to stop scientists (or other specialists) from stealing words with established definitions. Make up your own damn words!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom