Beagle:Hound::Bulldog:?
February 9, 2010 11:58 AM   Subscribe

Pedandry Filter: You can call a Beagle or Dachshund a "hound", what do you call a Bulldog or French Bulldog?

The AKC suggests that the bulldog is a member of the "non-sporting group", but that is not very catchy.

Beagle:Hound::Bulldog:______?
posted by 2bucksplus to Pets & Animals (12 answers total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 
Bully Breed? I'm not sure that correctly refers to English / French bulldogs as well as "Pit" bulls though.
posted by ghharr at 12:08 PM on February 9, 2010 [1 favorite]


They're generally known as "bully breeds", but that's not too catchy either.
posted by TomMelee at 12:09 PM on February 9, 2010


Frenchie is pretty common for French Bulldogs. Brachycephalic would be correct for both.

My, I like to call 'em fart machines or snore machines, but when it comes to dogs who snore and fart, I'm more of a pug gal.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 12:09 PM on February 9, 2010 [2 favorites]


Actually, it seems to me that a bulldog is as much a hound as a dachshund. Dachshunds are called hounds because of their name; and the 'hund' in their name is just the German word for 'dog.'
posted by koeselitz at 12:17 PM on February 9, 2010


Molosser
posted by neroli at 12:21 PM on February 9, 2010


Naw koes, hounds are a specific subset of dogs. Typically they've got long floppy ears and have some utility in hunting.

Dachunds are at the very edge of the hounddog set, with dogs like the Redbone and the Blue Tick and the Bloodhound being the more...visible? members of that category.

I used to know someone who referred to bulldogs as "underbiters", but the same applies to bulldogs/presa canario's...etc.
posted by TomMelee at 12:26 PM on February 9, 2010


The circumstances where you couldn't call a bulldog a hound too are pretty limited.

In those circumstances, you might:

(1) Not group them together at all. Hounds are united by the common purpose of tracking, driving, and sometimes bringing down prey at the command of a supervising hunter. But French bulldogs are/were originally companion animals, bulldogs are/were originally bred for fighting.

I'd suggest this as the most "proper" thing to do. A French bulldog isn't the same sort of dog as a bulldog, just as an Italian greyhound is a different sort of beast from a greyhound (and indeed in most kennel clubs the IG is a toy or companion, not in with the sighthounds).

(2) Call them both bully breeds.

(3) Call them both mastiff-derived dogs. Or, on preview, molossers, but I'd suggest mastiff-derived as more informative even if it uses a sloppier definition of "mastiff." Even then, neither bulldogs nor Frenchies really have a whole lot in common with mastiffs, DDBs, filas, or presas.

Dachunds are at the very edge of the hounddog set

I would bet money that if the dachshund had been developed in the UK or UK-controlled lands, it would have been classed as a terrier.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:34 PM on February 9, 2010


To be strictly pedantic, I think the word you're looking for may be pedantry rather than pedandry.

As a UK-born person, brought up among many dogs and several packs of hounds (beagles, harriers and foxhounds), with a father who judged hound shows, I've never heard of a dachshund classed as a terrier. Besides beagles, harriers and foxhounds, there are also (or were in my youth) otter hounds, deer hounds and wolf hounds, and I can recall no other breeds of hounds, but that's British usage not American usage. In the US I've heard of coon hounds and various others. In neither usage would a bulldog be a hound, though.
posted by anadem at 12:57 PM on February 9, 2010


I've never heard of a dachshund classed as a terrier

Yes, most kennel clubs put them in the/a hound group. But they are, in a real sense, terriers -- they go after buried prey, primarily because it is vermin, and do so with little active supervision by a hunter, and this requirement is the fundamental driving force behind the form they were bred for.

Besides beagles, harriers and foxhounds, there are also (or were in my youth) otter hounds, deer hounds and wolf hounds, and I can recall no other breeds of hounds

Erm. Afghans, bassets, greyhounds, elkhounds, pgbv, saluki, whippet, bloodhound...
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:15 PM on February 9, 2010


ROU_Xenophobe: “Yes, most kennel clubs put them in the/a hound group. But they are, in a real sense, terriers -- they go after buried prey, primarily because it is vermin, and do so with little active supervision by a hunter, and this requirement is the fundamental driving force behind the form they were bred for.”

I was thinking precisely of this fact when I said above that bulldogs are as much hounds as dachshunds. However, as much as I relish the chance to claim that the kennel clubs are wrong, I should be fair and say that there is indeed one area in which dachshunds differ significantly from terriers: they are excellent long-range trackers, and are in fact bred and rated on their ability to follow a long-range blood trail. That's not really an aspect of most terriers, I don't think, though it's more common among hounds.
posted by koeselitz at 1:33 PM on February 9, 2010


You could call them brachycephalics I suppose.

(And to further splinter the nitpicky derail, terriers were bred into dachshunds to develop the wirehaired variety. So there's that.)
posted by Lou Stuells at 2:42 PM on February 9, 2010


koeselitz: this is exactly why at least one kennel club (UKC?) puts dachshunds as their own group.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 3:08 PM on February 9, 2010


« Older Cross-linguistic romance   |   Which hotel would you recommend in San Juan? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.