• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

"Bird" as a Verb (1 Viewer)

cwbirder

Well-known member
United States
Hello everyone,

The other day I was arguing with a (non-birding) friend of mine who is (in my opinion) overly pedantic about word definitions. She was arguing that "bird" cannot be a verb (as in "to bird," eg "I would like to make a quick stop to bird that sewage treatment plant, because it is good for peeps."). Her point was that "bird" is not listed as a verb in any dictionary except Wiktionary, at least that we could find online, in the sense of "bird watching." There is an archaic sense of "to bird" that has the meaning of "pursuing birds with the intent to hunt them," but that was only in a few dictionaries and seems to not be in much current use (the references to this usage were from several centuries ago).

Because I am, perhaps, a bit obstinate about some things, I was trying to find the oldest recorded use of "bird" as a verb in the way that we birders use it today. I was able to find a quote in the Miami Herald newspaper from 1983 where a park ranger is quoted as saying "It's a very confusing thing to bird down here" [because the birds are in winter plumage, which makes them harder to ID]. The database I was using was one for newspapers, and only goes back to 1972. It also looks like the database is pretty North America-focused. It does carry a few of the major UK papers, and in searching these, I can't readily find any references to "bird" being used as a verb.

My questions for anyone who feels like joining in on this debate are:
1. Do birders outside of the US use "bird" as a stand-alone verb (meaning, essentially "to birdwatch" or "to birdwatch at" [place])?

2. Does anyone know of any usages of "bird" as a verb older than the 1983 newspaper article that I mentioned above?

3. Also, what are your thoughts? Do you use "bird" as a verb? Do you agree with my non-birding friend, that such a thing should not be allowed and is a travesty to the English language?
 
2. Does anyone know of any usages of "bird" as a verb older than the 1983 newspaper article that I mentioned above?

3. Also, what are your thoughts? Do you use "bird" as a verb? Do you agree with my non-birding friend, that such a thing should not be allowed and is a travesty to the English language?

I've been using "bird" as a verb since the 60s. It's included as a verb in my 1996 American Heritage Dictionary of the English language with the definition of “to observe and identify birds in their natural surroundings.” I see absolutely nothing wrong with using it as a verb.
 
Last edited:
I am English and very much use the verb to bird - might not be an official word, but accepted slang in this country - is very niche as a word though, used mostly by those that partake.
 
1 Yes, have done in the UK as long as I can remember, probably at least as long as Americans?

Scandinavian's also use the term, when speaking English anyway, would be interesting to ask if they use as a verb in their native language, do Germans go 'Vogeling' or the French 'Oiseauxing'......!?

3 Yes I do and most other birders do too, your friend is talking crap.


A
 
Last edited:
'She laments sir...her husband goes this morning a birding' -William Shakespeare.
(Unless of course your friend considers she has a better grasp of English than the immortal bard).
 
In Dutch "vogelen" can mean birdwatching now. But be careful: it can (and in Belgium it will) mean the same thing as in Germany.
 
Just consulted Mr. Google for help with our little problem. This from the Wikipedia entry for "birdwatching"--

"The first recorded use of the term birdwatcher was in 1891; bird was introduced as a verb in 1918.[3] The term birding was also used for the practice of fowling or hunting with firearms as in Shakespeare's The Merry Wives of Windsor (1602): "She laments sir... her husband goes this morning a-birding."[4] The terms birding and birdwatching are today used by some interchangeably. . ..".

[The paragraph continues with the sillyass assertion that "some participants" prefer "birding" to "birdwatching" on the grounds that the former includes the "auditory" dimension of the hobby.]
 
Last edited:
I read that some people scanned English texts and passed them through a computer, and many terms make their way to dictionaries only several decades after they became regular use. 'To bird' seems to be one. Are 'to google' or 'internet' in any English dictionary?
 
In any case, cwbirder, your friend is talking nonsense. There is no 'Academie' or 'Academia' that determines prescriptive rules on the English language (thankfully). The OED, Websters or Chambers or whoever have no authoritative remit...they are merely reporting on changes in usage, rather than legislating. English is flexible and has adapted to different cultures and groups worldwide in different ways. Here, 'Bird' as a verb is certainly used in its current sense only by 'Birdwatchers'. That doesn't mean it's wrong, only that I must use 'Birdwatching' if speaking to a non-Birder. Obviously 'Bird' as a verb has been in use for centuries, albeit with different meanings, i.e. to kill 'em, not just look at 'em. So what...a verb changes meaning slightly over the years. Fancy that;).
 
I definitely use bird as a verb, as do others in this hobby, and it seems generally understood by others outside the hobby as well. Language is dynamic, meanings and usage of words change over time and there's nothing wrong with accepting changes that become widely used.

Brings to mind a Calvin and Hobbes strip about "verbing", i.e. the tendency to take nouns and start using them as verbs. Maybe your friend agrees that "verbing weirds language":-O
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top