That looks to me like the effect of folk etymology, like the goshawk akupter (fast wings) turning into accipiter (grabber) and then avipiter (avis = bird > aoutour) because the speaker tries to make the word make sense. I mean, I don't see the difference from folk etymology, even though Wikipedia wants there to be one.
EDIT: "It's not a folk etymology, because this is the usage of one person rather than an entire speech community." So I guess this excludes it from irregardless at least. But I find this definition faulty, given that there are idiolects and so on. It seems like saying that a flower isn't red because there aren't enough flowers.