And then you see it everywhere?
Don’t know how to search for it, but I’ve seen it here on this board. I swear.
I’ve heard it called the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon when you learn something new and then see it again within 24 hours but that might be a relatively local term.
I found a few discussion on exactly this by Googling for
+“you learn a new word”
e.g. this one uses the neologism “diegogarcity”. Some also mention the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon as Inner Stickler did above.
Both of the terms suggested so far are new to me, however I have this suspicion I won’t be seeing them everywhere within the next 24 hours.
It sounds a little like confirmation bias to me. Once you know the word’s meaning, you notice it being used a lot more. If you are referring to how word usage appears to fluctuate according to the mysterious whims and influences of popular culture, the idea of *memes *is applicable.
Once I learned of the word schadenfreude, I noticed it being used a lot more. I really do think it has actually become more prevalent in current discourse…as more people learn its meaning, it spreads even more. Although, this could be confirmation bias on my part.
Synchronicity, perhaps?
Wikipedia gives the following as an example
So, while the above is not precisely the same as your phenomenon, it is similar in the sense that there is a coincidence of your learning the word coupled with an increase in your exposure to it that appears to be non-causal but nonetheless meaningful.
I don’t think it is - I first learned the word in the Seventies, and have definitely noticed it cropping up more frequently in the past few years.
That’s because of the Simpson’s
“Sour Grapes? Wow those Germans had a word for everything”
Not a whoosh. You just need to watch more Simpsons. 
It’s a safe bet that the current popularity of the word is largely attributable to its usage in The Simpsons.
There seems to be lots of confusion here. Let’s see if we can do better.
The OP refers to the phenomenon wherein your attention is drawn to a given idea or thing you hadn’t previously noticed much (if ever), and you then find yourself noticing many further instances of the same idea or thing within a short period of time, as if it had suddenly flourished.
The Wiki article on Baader-Meinhof phenomenon suggests this is a recent way of describing the phenomenon (although I personally had never come across it, nor have I ever heard anyone refer to it in this way). However, I think the rest of that particular Wiki article could prove unhelpfully confusing.
In cognitive terms, the phenomenon has to do with the concepts of ‘accessibility’ and ‘selective recognition’. You take in many thousands of impressions every day, even just walking down the street. Your mind is constantly sifting all these impressions, trying to sort whatever might be significant or interesting from the rest. If a specific idea has recently been brought to your attention, then for the next few days any further instances of that same idea are more likely than previously to ‘make the cut’ in terms of what your mind deems to be ‘significant’. The idea has been made more accessible, or more likely to be considered worthy of recognition.
Cognitive and social psychologists probably have several pet names for this phenomenon, although I am not sure there is one, specific term that is used with any consistency. Although ‘Baader-Meinhof’ may be a recent coinage, there have always been playful ways of alluding to this phenomenon. Many years ago, it was known as the ‘red car’ phenomenon. If I mention ‘red car’ to you, for the rest of the day (and maybe the next few days) you will notice red cars more than you would have done otherwise. The number of red cars stays the same, of course, but now you will notice them more often.
This is only distantly related to the idea of ‘confirmation bias’. This term usually refers to assessing various data (most often statistical data) and only attaching significance to data that confirms a pre-set conclusion, ignoring everything else. In less formal terms, it refers to the way that people who believe in crazy things only pay attention to scraps of information that seem to corroborate what they believe in, and ignore everything else. Astrology would be one good example.
It’s possible to link the phenomenon the OP refers to and ‘synchronicity’, but it could be unhelpful to do so, although it’s hard to explain why without going into details about Jungian psychology or Jungian analysis. There are lots of people who seem to think ‘synchronicity’ is just another word for ‘coincidence’. It isn’t.
What the OP refers to has nothing to do with ‘schadenfreude’, which is ‘taking pleasure in another’s misfortune’.
ianzin, I love it when you talk all nerdy like that, but I believe MaceMan merely offered “schadenfreude” as an example of “a word I didn’t know but which I encountered many times shortly after discovering it” and that became a mini-hijack.
Nava - got it. Sorry, Maceman!
Thanks for clearing that up … and you’re right, I absolutely should …
Some use the etymologists niche jargon “Diegogarcity” <a href=“http://www.wordorigins.org/index.php/forums/viewthread/4/”>Diegogarcity</a> ed - [ how do I link that reference?]
I noticed this phenomenon with schadenfreude also. It was in big bold letters on the cover of some magazine. The article mentioned the Gwyneth Paltrow-Brad Pitt break up as an example. After reading that article I started noticing its usage. Same with emasculate which I learned from a Blossom episode.
And have you ever noticed that once actors/ actresses reach a certain level of fame you start noticing their bit parts from earlier films?
Could also be the Avenue Q song.
Edited to add: NSFW
I remember once I read something quite obscure (can’t remember what) and then the next day someone on the SMBD set up a thread about it.
I visited Diegogar City once. I’d never even noticed it was there before.
I wonder, with language, if there’s not some issue of “new” words becoming quickly used regularly, almost hyperused, once introduced to a social circle, hence more noticed.
Personally, I’ve noticed, more than ever, people are using the word “elided” in my social circle lately. Unfortunately, many of them are using it incorrectly, or where “erased” is much more correct in context. This was a word I saw once in a blue moon to now four times in the last week alone. It makes me wonder if there’s a word for that sort of thing.