If you notice, this is a very unusual column for Cecil. An assertion is made with absolutely no attribution whatsoever, and essentially no comment either.
I prefer to believe that Cecil did not actually write this column.
::Goes off to study patterns in the text to reveal any secret messages indicating that Cecil was being held hostage and forced under torture to make false statements::
I’ve concluded, after exhaustive research, that the “shake 'em up” column was written by Cecil under duress, is completely false, and contains encoded messages to indicate this.
His initial response in its entirety:
The first sentence is an imperative to “get ready for this”, a warning to prepare ourselves for what we’re about to read. Note that this message is addressed to “Lar”. “Lar” is, of course, the word “liar”, but without the “I”, indicating that this is the word of a liar, and that there is no “I” to be found in it – in other words, THESE ARE NOT CECIL’S WORDS!
Sentence 2: As we all know, to “shake things up” is to subvert the established order. If we are “ready for this” message, we see that we are being instructed to read this column against the grain. Cecil is inviting us to deconstruct his message!
The third sentence implies that we should be looking for something other than what we expect – that is, Cecil. The term used here provides even more clues. Deconstruct the blatantly self-conscious word “rhombicosidodecahedron”, as we have just been instructed to do. It is composed of 3 parts: rhombi, cosi, and dodecahedron. These, when anagrammed, form “rcd”. RCD is a manufacturer of RESISTORS. We are to resist the apparent meaning of these words, just as Cecil is resisting the will of his captors.
Now, let’s take a closer look at the parts of this vitally important word:
Rhombi is a prefix meaning “rhomboid”, which Webster’s defines as “an oblique-sided parallelogram with only the opposite sides equal”. So this answer is “oblique” rather than direct, and it is also ironic or intentionally paradoxical, as the “opposite side” (or opposite position or view) is “equal”. And as we all know, the “equal” side in a mathematical equation shows us what is true. So we are to read this column as EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT IS STATED!
Cosi: There are 3 hidden meanings here. Cosi fan tutte is a comic opera by Mozart, a fact well known to Dopers. We see here a blatant undercutting of the tendency toward literal interpretation. Also note the allusion to “cosignatory” or someone who signs for someone else. These are NOT CECIL’S words, but the words of someone signing in Cecil’s name! Finally, there is a direct allusion to the mathematical function of the “cosine” which is defined as “the sine of a complement of a given angle or arc”. Again, we are not to read a direct meaning here, but rather a “complementary” (or opposite) meaning.
Dodecahedron: A solid figure having 12 faces. A clear reference to multiple faces, a common metaphor for multiple or false meanings. Also an allusion to the 12 sections of the clock face, indicating that time is running out, and CECIL IS BEING HELD AGAINST HIS WILL!
Note that there is absolutely no reason to mention rhombuses, cosines, or dodecahedrons in references to a globe. This is a CLEAR MESSAGE to us, the faithful, who will understand, while his infidel captors are not informed enough to catch the signals.
“Cecil” continues: “Till you guys get your act together, I’m sticking with 'shake-‘em-ups.’” Nothing could be more blatant. When we “get our act together” and realize what’s going on, Cecil will no longer “stick with” these words. In other words, he will retract (and reveal the truth) when we have figured out the message he’s so desperately trying to send us!
The next statement uses 2 sets of digits in sequence: 4, followed by a set of four 1’s. This leaves us with 41111. Of course, this is 411 (the number dialed when requesting information, or the truth) followed by 11. The 11th card of the major arcana of the tarot deck, surely known to Cecil, is “Justice”. Cecil is calling for truth and justice!
His final entry is one word only – VERY RARE AND UNUSUAL FOR CECIL. We need to pay special attention!
Could there be a more obvious cry for help?! Note also the connection with the Monty Python skit so popular among Dopers. This directly mimics the cry of the writer who has left instructions for finding the Holy Grail, the hidden vessel which contains as yet unrevealed truth. Immediately after this line in the Python film, we discover this statement: “He was dictating”.
Friends, Dopers, I submit to you, THESE ARE NOT THE WORDS OF THE MASTER!
Be ye not deceived!
Perhaps we’re thinking too much in the present.
Since these things have been around for 100 years, I wondered what my grandmother(who had two) called them.
So I posted the question over at the American Dialect Society Mailing List. One reply came from Ben Zimmer, a member who is perhaps our best database searcher. His reply
Since paperweights were more common in the first half of the 20th century, his findings don’t surprise me.
My own searches of the newspaper databases indicate that “snow globe” and “snow dome” were not used to describe these things before about 1965-1975, and even then it wasn’t a common term.
Assuming Cecil encountered these at his grandmother’s house, he might never have heard the terms.
I think I have heard them called snowglobes about 95% of the time with the odd “snow-shaker” thrown in for good measure. Never in my life have I heard of a “shake-em-up” though. I guess Cecil was hungover when he wrote this particular column.
Here’s another vote for snowglobes. I’ve never heard them referred to as anything else until today.
Yeah, I read that column just now and was surprised to hear anything other than “snowglobes” used. It’s all I’ve ever heard.
I know that in Virginia we refer to them as snowglobes. However, that being said, I have purchased them in the store and heard them referred to as anything from Waterdome to “Snowy Christmas Paperweights”. I would think that the ones that don’t operate on snow (such as the Egyptian Plagues one mentioned previously) would be better known as a plain waterdome. Another interesting note: most of the ones I’ve seen labeled as “waterdome” tended to be musical as well.
Gee, no one called them “snowballs”?
Okay, me neither. 
Another vote here for snowglobes.
With my limited French, I think that this translates to snowball. There is a Rhododendron ‘Boule de Neige’ that is quite attractive.
best to all,
plynck
Go to http://www.uspto.gov (this is the US Patent & Trademark Office’s Site). A brief search here (in the trademark section since patents are often described rather than named) showed that, although it’s not a dictionary of sorts, the USPTO casually refers to the manufacturers of these devices as being involved in the goods and services (G and S) market manufacturing “snow globes.” To put it another way, the USPTO seems to thing they’re called snow globes.
My 2 cents.
-dan
I too must vote for snow-globes. I have always heard them referred to as snow-globes.
What’s the earliest cite for “snow globes” from the US Patent/Trademark Office?
Earliest I can see is 6/15/83 to “Kitty Cucumber” for the use of that mark on various containers and toys including “Novelty Item - Namely, Snow Globes”.
The serial # is 73436658
Owner is B. Shackman & Company, Inc.
CORPORATION
NEW YORK
85 Fifth Ave. New York NEW YORK 10003
That was trademark, btw, SamClem.
I don’t know how complete their mark database is. We use it often, but only for live marks. (The search referenced above included live and dead marks.)
The patent database is fully searchable post-1975. Before '76, it’s only searchable by patent # or classification.
Patent searches after '75 include devices described not only as “snow globes” but also as “Circulating fluid amusement device” and “Decorative article with flake circulating means”.
The earliest I see is the latter, which appears to be a patent for a device to make the snow globe “snow” without shaking it.
Patent No. 5,666,750
The text of the record is extensive, and includes links to related records as far back as 1952. Unfortunately, the link to the image of the 1952 document is broken.
In the section “Summary of the Invention” the term “snow globe” appears to stand as a generic term for this kind of item, as in:
Holy shit! All this time and energy focused on this. Yeah, I know. I’m actually reading this stuff, and now I’m actually posting. Pathetic!
Snowglobes/snow globes here too.
Shake-em-ups? Are you kidding me?
I keep telling you guys that I’m right more often than Cecil and I don’t have a [del]team of flunkies[/del] research staff to my work for me.
No, I’m not saying I’m right all the time. I’m saying that Cecil’s batting average is a heck of a lot lower than all you [del]Cecil-worshiping-toadies[/del] Cecil-worshiping-toadies want to think.
Edited to provide space for you to add smilie of your choice.
I’m not sure what your post means. You mean you found out that Cecil was wrong on this topic? You mean you found a cite which proves him wrong? What exactly do you mean?
OK. State of the art on the names for this item. (According to ME) 
I can find a newspaper ad in the US¶ from 1926, calling it a “snowglobe.”
Of course, that means nothing as to what it was called by the general public, what it was called by the people who invented it, etc.
I’m eager for anyone to contribute anything factual about the historical names it might have had.
Ths Short Hills Mall in NJ has gigantic ones that you can enter every Christmas season (I gather some other national high-tone malls do, too). “Snow Globes”.
And, unless I misremember, that’s also the term used in the scripts of Babylon 5.
The first term I learned was “paperweight”, but…
