For crying out loud
mm
"Christ".**
What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
**These are English usage questions. Someone off-topic maybe is the
reason. I have always thought it is out of respect for Jesus that
people avoid using his name, etc. lightly. Am I right?
--
Posters should say where they live, and for which area
they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in
Western Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn, NY 12 years
Baltimore 26 years
Murray Arnow
>I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
>"Christ".**
>
>What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>
>**These are English usage questions. Someone off-topic maybe is the
>reason. I have always thought it is out of respect for Jesus that
>people avoid using his name, etc. lightly. Am I right?
>
>
John Ciardi sez:
for crying out loud! Exclamation of vexation. [A minced oath.
A late-XIX Am. altered form of for Christ's sake! or Chrissake!
As if the speaker had started so say `for Christ..." when he
thought better of speaking the oath and shifted to the meaningless
"...ing out loud!" Gee! Geez! and Gee whiz! are similarly bitten
off and altered forms of Jesus.]
Patok
Totally fascinating! I had no idea some of these exclamations were
aborted mentionings of god. Especially 'criminy' and "For crying out
loud". One could guess, I guess, about 'gee' and relatives, even though
such prudishness smacks of almost Taliban-ness, and seems preposterous
from a natural, agnostic point of view.
--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.
--
Whoever bans a book, shall be banished. Whoever burns a book, shall burn.
Ray O'Hara
"mm" <NOPSAM...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:7judp519prfpeg30g...@4ax.com...
>I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
> "Christ".**
>
> What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
Fucken A! is common.
annily
> Murray Arnow wrote:
>> mm wrote:
>>> I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
>>> "Christ".**
>>>
>>> What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>>
>>> **These are English usage questions. Someone off-topic maybe is the
>>> reason. I have always thought it is out of respect for Jesus that
>>> people avoid using his name, etc. lightly. Am I right?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> John Ciardi sez:
>>
>> for crying out loud! Exclamation of vexation. [A minced oath. A
>> late-XIX Am. altered form of for Christ's sake! or Chrissake!
>> As if the speaker had started so say `for Christ..." when he
>> thought better of speaking the oath and shifted to the meaningless
>> "...ing out loud!" Gee! Geez! and Gee whiz! are similarly bitten
>> off and altered forms of Jesus.]
>
>
> Totally fascinating! I had no idea some of these exclamations were
> aborted mentionings of god. Especially 'criminy' and "For crying out
> loud". One could guess, I guess, about 'gee' and relatives, even though
> such prudishness smacks of almost Taliban-ness, and seems preposterous
> from a natural, agnostic point of view.
>
I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for crying
out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same boat.
--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.
Steve Hayes
>I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for crying
>out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same boat.
"Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a bucket".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Jerry Friedman
> "mm" <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
In both senses, but are you connecting it with "for crying out loud"?
I've certainly never known what the "A" is.
And is "fucken" the past participle? There's a very well-known joke
about Boston lurking here.
--
Jerry Friedman
R H Draney
>
>On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:12:12 +1030, annily <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote:
>
>>I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for crying
>>out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same boat.
>
>"Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a bucket".
My grandmother used to exclaim "for cryin' out softly in the rain"...I can't be
sure it wasn't a song lyric at one time....r
--
"Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly."
- Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
Pat Durkin
"Jerry Friedman" <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fc0eef06-55e9-43b1...@x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 9, 8:19 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "mm" <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:7judp519prfpeg30g...@4ax.com...
>>
>> >I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding
>> >saying
>> > "Christ".**
>>
>> > What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>
>> Fucken A! is common.
>
> In both senses, but are you connecting it with "for crying out
> loud"?
> I've certainly never known what the "A" is.
From "Forever and _aye_. I think.
Another version of "cry": For cry eye (or maybe some would have
spelled it "aye").
And then for criminy: criminently.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>Murray Arnow wrote:
>> mm wrote:
>>> I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
>>> "Christ".**
>>>
>>> What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>>
>>> **These are English usage questions. Someone off-topic maybe is the
>>> reason. I have always thought it is out of respect for Jesus that
>>> people avoid using his name, etc. lightly. Am I right?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> John Ciardi sez:
>>
>> for crying out loud! Exclamation of vexation. [A minced oath.
>> A late-XIX Am. altered form of for Christ's sake! or Chrissake!
>> As if the speaker had started so say `for Christ..." when he
>> thought better of speaking the oath and shifted to the meaningless
>> "...ing out loud!" Gee! Geez! and Gee whiz! are similarly bitten
>> off and altered forms of Jesus.]
>
>
> Totally fascinating! I had no idea some of these exclamations were
>aborted mentionings of god. Especially 'criminy' and "For crying out
>loud". One could guess, I guess, about 'gee' and relatives, even though
>such prudishness smacks of almost Taliban-ness, and seems preposterous
>from a natural, agnostic point of view.
>
From an atheist point of view, certainly. Agnosticism implies
uncertainty. If there is a creator, the Lord God, who is offended by
such things it would be best not to "take the Lord's name in vain"
(paraphrase of one of the Ten Commandments).
The commandment: "You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God,
for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name"[1] is
higher in the list than that about not murdering people. It is not
surprising therefore that some believers take it very seriously.
It is a matter of personal (spiritual) health and safety.
[1]
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20%3A2-17&version=NIV
Yours agnostically, Peter.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.english.usage)
Peter Moylan
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Peter Moylan
> Steve Hayes filted:
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:12:12 +1030, annily <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for crying
>>> out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same boat.
>> "Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a bucket".
>
> My grandmother used to exclaim "for cryin' out softly in the rain"...I can't be
> sure it wasn't a song lyric at one time....r
>
"Dragon in the dust".
Peter Moylan
> And is "fucken" the past participle? There's a very well-known joke
> about Boston lurking here.
ROTFLMAO. Really! I had forgotten that joke until you mentioned it.
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
>
>"Jerry Friedman" <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:fc0eef06-55e9-43b1...@x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com...
>> On Mar 9, 8:19 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> "mm" <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:7judp519prfpeg30g...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> >I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding
>>> >saying
>>> > "Christ".**
>>>
>>> > What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>>
>>> Fucken A! is common.
>>
>> In both senses, but are you connecting it with "for crying out
>> loud"?
>> I've certainly never known what the "A" is.
>
>From "Forever and _aye_. I think.
Then the A in "fuckin' A" would not be a long one, which it always has
been when I've heard the expression. Or maybe we don't pronounce "aye"
the same way; I say eye.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs,
An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE
John Dean
> On Mar 9, 8:19 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "mm" <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:7judp519prfpeg30g...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding
>>> saying "Christ".**
>>
>>> What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>
>> Fucken A! is common.
>
> In both senses, but are you connecting it with "for crying out loud"?
> I've certainly never known what the "A" is.
>
I take it to be the marking between A plus and A minus. Jesse's F-Word says
"unknown; perhaps taken from a phrase such as "you're fucking A-number-one
right!" "
His earliest cite is Mailer's 'Naked & Dead' "You're fuggin ay"
Though he also cites instances where "fucking a" means bad rather than good.
And I am indebted to Daryl Ponicsan for "Fuckin A well told aye I be go to
hell in a forklift John Dittybag"
--
John Dean
Oxford
Pat Durkin
"Chuck Riggs" <chr...@eircom.net> wrote in message
news:v24fp5pufq3h5c9j5...@4ax.com...
I pronounce it both as "eye" and as "a(long a)" as in your and Jerry's
"A"--probably because I leaned "aye" to rhyme with "day", and to be
interchangeable with Forever and a day".
Frank ess
Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:12:12 +1030, annily <ann...@annily.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for
>> crying out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same
>> boat.
>
> "Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a
> bucket".
In mid-1940s South Los Angeles my colorful neighbor said
"Crime-a-nettles!" or Crim-a-netley!"
That's the place and time I was punished for shouting "G-O-D dammit!"
I suppose I must have thought the "bad" word was the deity name and
wouldn't be held accountable if it were spelled out.
--
Frank ess
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Did Walt Disney understand the meaning of "Jiminy Cricket"?
That one seems to have had an interesting history. The OED cites "By
Jiminy Cricket" to 1848, but implies that the first word came from
"Gemini". But for that sense of "Gemini" glossed as "A mild form of
oath or exclamation" and cited to 1664, they say
Perhaps a distinct word. Cf. Ger. _gemine_, _jemine_, which
Hildebrand (in _Grimm's D. Wb._) regards as a corruption of _Jesu
domine_; also Du. _jemenie_, _jemie_.
So it looks as though it's possible that "Jiminy" may have started out
as a simple phonetic reduction of an actual Latin oath, been folk-
etymologized into referring to a pagan reference, and then further
reanalyzed as being a minced oath for "Jesus Christ", at which point a
second element ("Christmas" or "Cricket[s]") was added to fit.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |If you think health care is
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |expensive now, wait until you see
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |what it costs when it's free.
| P.J. O'Rourke
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Frank ess
I've forgotten which of my friends or acquaintances said
"Fucken-a-John-Tweed". Might have been a Canadian (Montreal) emigrant.
Not closely related to "(You can) bet your fucken A (on that)"?
--
Frank ess
Maria Conlon
> Steve Hayes wrote:
>> annily wrote:
>>
>>> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for
>>> crying out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same
>>> boat.
>>
>> "Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a
>> bucket".
>
> In mid-1940s South Los Angeles my colorful neighbor said
> "Crime-a-nettles!" or Crim-a-netley!"
Comedian George Gobel used to say "crime-in-It'ly" (or something that
sounded like that) back in the early 1950s.
>
[...]
And my mother-in-law used the phrase "Cheese and rice and all his
apostles."
--
Maria Conlon
Quote from George Gobel: "If it weren't for electricity we'd all be
watching television by candlelight." Had he died more recently than
1991, he might have said "If it werent for electricy we'd be reading AUE
by candlelight.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Quote from George Gobel: "If it weren't for electricity we'd all be
>watching television by candlelight."
Exactly two weeks ago (to the minute) I *was* watching television by
candlelight.
There was a brownout, a voltage drop in our electricity supply. The
voltage was not enough to get more than a useless dim glow out of some
light bulbs. The energy-saving bulbs did not come on at all. So I needed
to light a few candles to see what I was doing. However, one television
worked sufficiently well to show a programme that I had recorded
previously on a USB flashdrive and was able to play on a media player
that also was able to function on the reduced supply voltage.
http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/accessories/0,39100116,49303882,00.htm
Cece
Evan Kirshenbaum
> On Mar 10, 10:10�am, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>> Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep> writes:
>> > Did Walt Disney understand the meaning of "Jiminy Cricket"?
>>
>> That one seems to have had an interesting history. �The OED cites "By
>> Jiminy Cricket" to 1848, but implies that the first word came from
>> "Gemini". �But for that sense of "Gemini" glossed as "A mild form of
>> oath or exclamation" and cited to 1664, they say
>>
>> � � Perhaps a distinct word. Cf. Ger. _gemine_, _jemine_, which
>> � � Hildebrand (in _Grimm's D. Wb._) regards as a corruption of _Jesu
>> � � domine_; also Du. _jemenie_, _jemie_.
>>
>> So it looks as though it's possible that "Jiminy" may have started
>> out as a simple phonetic reduction of an actual Latin oath, been
>> folk- etymologized into referring to a pagan reference, and then
>> further reanalyzed as being a minced oath for "Jesus Christ", at
>> which point a second element ("Christmas" or "Cricket[s]") was
>> added to fit.
>
> What about "by Jove"?
That one appears to have always been a reference to Jove (i.e.,
Jupiter, which etymologically came from "Jovis-pater") rather than a
minced oath for a Christian deity. I'd assume based on such use in
pre-Christian Roman texts. The OED cites "Jove" to ca. 1374 and "By
Jove" to 1575.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |People think it must be fun to be a
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |super genius, but they don't
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |realize how hard it is to put up
|with all the idiots in the world.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | Calvin
(650)857-7572
John Varela
wrote:
> Totally fascinating! I had no idea some of these exclamations were
> aborted mentionings of god. Especially 'criminy' and "For crying out
> loud". One could guess, I guess, about 'gee' and relatives, even though
> such prudishness smacks of almost Taliban-ness, and seems preposterous
> from a natural, agnostic point of view.
Believers are abjured not to take the Lord's name in vain, so they
use these minced oaths. Even if you are not a believer, if you are,
or think you might be, in the presence of believers, it is simple
courtesy to comply with the commandment.
--
John Varela
mm
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:04:34 -0500, Patok <crazy.d...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Murray Arnow wrote:
>>> mm wrote:
>>>> I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
>>>> "Christ".**
>>>>
>>>> What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>>>
>>>> **These are English usage questions. Someone off-topic maybe is the
>>>> reason. I have always thought it is out of respect for Jesus that
>>>> people avoid using his name, etc. lightly. Am I right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> John Ciardi sez:
>>>
>>> for crying out loud! Exclamation of vexation. [A minced oath.
>>> A late-XIX Am. altered form of for Christ's sake! or Chrissake!
>>> As if the speaker had started so say `for Christ..." when he
>>> thought better of speaking the oath and shifted to the meaningless
>>> "...ing out loud!" Gee! Geez! and Gee whiz! are similarly bitten
>>> off and altered forms of Jesus.]
>>
>>
>> Totally fascinating! I had no idea some of these exclamations were
>>aborted mentionings of god. Especially 'criminy' and "For crying out
>>loud". One could guess, I guess, about 'gee' and relatives, even though
>>such prudishness smacks of almost Taliban-ness, and seems preposterous
Wow. Taliban. That's pretty strong language, much stronger than
applies imo. For Jews, we don't use G-d's name and some of his titles
that have become equivalent to his name for pretty much the same
reason that a person doesn't call his father Harry and his mother
Betty just because those are their names. It's more respectful to
call them Dad and Mom, or words that mean that.
>>from a natural, agnostic point of view.
>>
>From an atheist point of view, certainly. Agnosticism implies
>uncertainty. If there is a creator, the Lord God, who is offended by
>such things it would be best not to "take the Lord's name in vain"
>(paraphrase of one of the Ten Commandments).
>
>The commandment: "You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God,
>for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name"[1] is
>higher in the list than that about not murdering people. It is not
>surprising therefore that some believers take it very seriously.
Just for the record, for Jews that commandment prohibits taking oaths
in vain, including taking an oath that something happened when it
didn't, or taking an oath to do soething and not living up to it.
>It is a matter of personal (spiritual) health and safety.
>
>[1]
>http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20%3A2-17&version=NIV
>
>Yours agnostically, Peter.
--
John Varela
In my experience, "fuckin' A" is not a term of approbation, it just
means something like "You've got that right!" or "That's correct."
--
John Varela
R H Draney
>
>Cece <ceceliaa...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> On Mar 10, 10:10 am, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>>> Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep> writes:
>>> > Did Walt Disney understand the meaning of "Jiminy Cricket"?
>>>
>>> That one seems to have had an interesting history. The OED cites "By
>>> Jiminy Cricket" to 1848, but implies that the first word came from
>>> "Gemini". But for that sense of "Gemini" glossed as "A mild form of
>>> oath or exclamation" and cited to 1664, they say
>>>
>>> Perhaps a distinct word. Cf. Ger. _gemine_, _jemine_, which
>>> Hildebrand (in _Grimm's D. Wb._) regards as a corruption of _Jesu
>>> domine_; also Du. _jemenie_, _jemie_.
>>>
>>> So it looks as though it's possible that "Jiminy" may have started
>>> out as a simple phonetic reduction of an actual Latin oath, been
>>> folk- etymologized into referring to a pagan reference, and then
>>> further reanalyzed as being a minced oath for "Jesus Christ", at
>>> which point a second element ("Christmas" or "Cricket[s]") was
>>> added to fit.
>>
>> What about "by Jove"?
>
>That one appears to have always been a reference to Jove (i.e.,
>Jupiter, which etymologically came from "Jovis-pater") rather than a
>minced oath for a Christian deity. I'd assume based on such use in
>pre-Christian Roman texts. The OED cites "Jove" to ca. 1374 and "By
>Jove" to 1575.
When did "By Jingo" come along?...obviously before 1920:
http://turtleservices.com/OhByJingoOhByGee.htm
Reinhold {Rey} Aman
[...]
> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>
Here you go: "Fuck!" or "Shit!"
--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
R H Draney
>
>Maybe it would be easier to make a list of exclamations that aren't
>minced oaths, that aren't euphemisms for profanity or scatology, and
>are just polite, secular interjections.
>
>Can anyone think of any?
>
>Let me try. Tell me if I don't meet my own standard.
>
>Wow! But that only works for wonderment.
>Huh? But that only works for questoining or mild surprise.
>Nuts. Some General said that, although I'm sure he wasn't the first.
> I don't know the origin.
>Fooey. That probably doesn't meet my standard.
>Nonsense. That only works for nonsense.
>
>I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
Hey!...
From AUE tradition: Oy!...
If we're allowed to use 21st-century coinages, there's also "w00t!"...r
Patok
Oh, OK. I realize it sounds harsher than it was intended. The Taliban
were, AFAIK, primarily very diligent/obsessive scholars, and got their
bad rap only because they were applying their teachings in practice.
Hence my observation, that avoiding mentioning gods' names was like
Taliban in prudishness. Nothing more. But of course, not being a
practicing religion anything, I had forgotten that that commandment is
higher in the list than that about not murdering people. Wow.
>> >from a natural, agnostic point of view.
>>From an atheist point of view, certainly. Agnosticism implies
>> uncertainty. If there is a creator, the Lord God, who is offended by
>> such things it would be best not to "take the Lord's name in vain"
>> (paraphrase of one of the Ten Commandments).
That's one way of looking at it. I'm agnostic, as far as I don't know
whether there's a creator of the universe or not. But as far as the
possibility that there is a god like the one in the Bible, I'm firmly an
atheist. Such a monster as depicted in that book simply cannot exist; if
it does, I'd better be in Hades, than share a paradise with it. So, I
have no compunction about mentioning its 'name', in vain or not.
>> The commandment: "You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God,
>> for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name"[1] is
>> higher in the list than that about not murdering people. It is not
>> surprising therefore that some believers take it very seriously.
>
> Just for the record, for Jews that commandment prohibits taking oaths
> in vain, including taking an oath that something happened when it
> didn't, or taking an oath to do soething and not living up to it.
>
>> It is a matter of personal (spiritual) health and safety.
>>
>> [1]
>> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20%3A2-17&version=NIV
>>
>> Yours agnostically, Peter.
--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.
--
Whoever bans a book, shall be banished. Whoever burns a book, shall burn.
CDB
CDB
> annily wrote:
>
[Jesus wept!]
>>
>> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for
>> crying out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same
>> boat.
>>
> Did Walt Disney understand the meaning of "Jiminy Cricket"?
>
Pinocchio's sins.
CDB
>
33Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time,
Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine
oaths:
34But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is
God's throne:
35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem;
for it is the city of the great King.
36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make
one hair white or black.
37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever
is more than these cometh of evil.
>
>
These minced oaths are in violation of that advice. I remember
someone wondering why there were never any fights about attempts to
exhibit the Sermon on the Mount in small-town courthouses.
Chuck Riggs
<kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>Cece <ceceliaa...@yahoo.com> writes:
<snip>
>> What about "by Jove"?
>
>That one appears to have always been a reference to Jove (i.e.,
>Jupiter, which etymologically came from "Jovis-pater") rather than a
>minced oath for a Christian deity. I'd assume based on such use in
>pre-Christian Roman texts. The OED cites "Jove" to ca. 1374 and "By
>Jove" to 1575.
It is only by coincidence, then, that Jupiter, Jove and Jesus start
with the same letter, "By Mars", for example, not being a common oath?
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
<snip>
>When did "By Jingo" come along?...obviously before 1920:
>
> http://turtleservices.com/OhByJingoOhByGee.htm
"Gee" is mentioned on that poster, yet another reference to Jesus,
according to my grandmother. My mother rarely said it, I was told, in
her mother's presence.
Chuck Riggs
<am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>mm wrote:
>[...]
>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>>
>Here you go: "Fuck!" or "Shit!"
"Balls!", "damn!".
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
I promise not to snicker while they pray, as long as they give me the
right to occasionally pontificate -- oh so briefly -- on why believing
is nonsensical.
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
>"Chuck Riggs" <chr...@eircom.net> wrote in message
>news:v24fp5pufq3h5c9j5...@4ax.com...
<snip>
>> Then the A in "fuckin' A" would not be a long one, which it always
>> has
>> been when I've heard the expression. Or maybe we don't pronounce
>> "aye"
>> the same way; I say eye.
>
>I pronounce it both as "eye" and as "a(long a)" as in your and Jerry's
>"A"--probably because I leaned "aye" to rhyme with "day", and to be
>interchangeable with Forever and a day".
Aye with day and you're from Pennsylvania? I'm flabbergasted, for I've
been there many times. Lived there, even, but as a kid.
I also don't understand how my lines from yesterday got rejiggered,
above.
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:38:24 UTC, "John Dean"
How are those not terms of approbation, or approval as I call it?
Evan Kirshenbaum
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:24:06 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
> <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>>Cece <ceceliaa...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> What about "by Jove"?
>>
>>That one appears to have always been a reference to Jove (i.e.,
>>Jupiter, which etymologically came from "Jovis-pater") rather than a
>>minced oath for a Christian deity. I'd assume based on such use in
>>pre-Christian Roman texts. The OED cites "Jove" to ca. 1374 and "By
>>Jove" to 1575.
>
> It is only by coincidence, then, that Jupiter, Jove and Jesus start
> with the same letter, "By Mars", for example, not being a common
> oath?
"Jesus" is the odd one out there. "Jove" and "Jupiter" share a common
origin, "Jupiter" apparently having come from "Father Jove". Jesus
was named after Joshua, whose name comes from "YHWH saves". (His
original name was simply "Hosea" ("Salvation").)
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Never ascribe to malice that which
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |can adequately be explained by
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |stupidity.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Steve Hayes
>When did "By Jingo" come along?...obviously before 1920:
>
According to this site, 1878
http://www.cyberussr.com/hcunn/q-jingo.html
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Evan Kirshenbaum
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:59:00 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman
> <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>mm wrote:
>>[...]
>>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>>>
>>Here you go: "Fuck!" or "Shit!"
>
> "Balls!", "damn!".
"Fuck", "shit", and "damn" work in both positive and negative
situations, but "balls" seems to be strictly negative. (Then again, I
haven't heard it much.)
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Of course, over the first 10^-10
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |seconds and 10^-30 cubic
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |centimeters it averages out to
|zero, but when you look in
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |detail....
(650)857-7572 | Philip Morrison
Pat Durkin
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:55:42 -0600, "Pat Durkin" <durk...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Chuck Riggs" <chr...@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>news:v24fp5pufq3h5c9j5...@4ax.com...
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Then the A in "fuckin' A" would not be a long one, which it always
>>> has
>>> been when I've heard the expression. Or maybe we don't pronounce
>>> "aye"
>>> the same way; I say eye.
>>
>>I pronounce it both as "eye" and as "a(long a)" as in your and
>>Jerry's
>>"A"--probably because I leaned "aye" to rhyme with "day", and to be
>>interchangeable with Forever and a day".
>
> Aye with day and you're from Pennsylvania? I'm flabbergasted, for
> I've
> been there many times. Lived there, even, but as a kid.
> I also don't understand how my lines from yesterday got rejiggered,
> above.
I don't see any jiggering in the lines. But I hasten to correct your
misunderstanding as to my location. I am from your "flyover" region,
Chuck, and completely understand your lack of knowledge about many
usages in your native land.
--
Pat Durkin
durkinpa at msn.com
Wisconsin
musika
Evan Kirshenbaum <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> typed:
> Chuck Riggs <chr...@eircom.net> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:59:00 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman
>> <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>> mm wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>>>>
>>> Here you go: "Fuck!" or "Shit!"
>>
>> "Balls!", "damn!".
>
> "Fuck", "shit", and "damn" work in both positive and negative
> situations, but "balls" seems to be strictly negative. (Then again, I
> haven't heard it much.)
"The dog's balls" (or bollocks) is very positive.
--
Ray
UK
mm
<kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>Chuck Riggs <chr...@eircom.net> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:59:00 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman
>> <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>>mm wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>>>>
>>>Here you go: "Fuck!" or "Shit!"
>>
>> "Balls!", "damn!".
>
>"Fuck", "shit", and "damn" work in both positive and negative
>situations, but "balls" seems to be strictly negative. (Then again, I
>haven't heard it much.)
From my prior post, "Maybe it would be easier to make a list of
exclamations that aren't minced oaths, that aren't euphemisms for
profanity or scatology, and are just polite, secular interjections.
Can anyone think of any?"
mm
wrote:
Why would you want to do that, even briefly, to people who are your
hosts, or think you are their friend?
Would you imagine that if they are polite in return that that implies
you were polite to ridicule their views? It doesn't imply that.
James Hogg
Samuel L. Jackson learned the difference in "The 51st State":
So, let me get this straight. "Bollocks" is bad, whereas "the dogs
bollocks" is good, huh?
--
James
James Hogg
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:14:10 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
> <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>> Chuck Riggs <chr...@eircom.net> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:59:00 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman
>>> <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> mm wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>>>>>
>>>> Here you go: "Fuck!" or "Shit!"
>>> "Balls!", "damn!".
>> "Fuck", "shit", and "damn" work in both positive and negative
>> situations, but "balls" seems to be strictly negative. (Then again, I
>> haven't heard it much.)
>
> From my prior post, "Maybe it would be easier to make a list of
> exclamations that aren't minced oaths, that aren't euphemisms for
> profanity or scatology, and are just polite, secular interjections.
>
> Can anyone think of any?"
Ouch! Wow! Boy! Man! Hoots!
--
James
James Hogg
> In message <ivthp59pvq5lplm5f...@4ax.com> Chuck
> <chr...@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:24:06 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
>> <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>>> Cece <ceceliaa...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> <snip>
>
>>>> What about "by Jove"?
>>>
>>> That one appears to have always been a reference to Jove (i.e.,
>>> Jupiter, which etymologically came from "Jovis-pater") rather than a
>>> minced oath for a Christian deity. I'd assume based on such use in
>>> pre-Christian Roman texts. The OED cites "Jove" to ca. 1374 and "By
>>> Jove" to 1575.
>
>> It is only by coincidence, then, that Jupiter, Jove and Jesus start
>> with the same letter,
>
> endured for this reason.
>
>> "By Mars", for example, not being a common oath?
>
Mehercle!
--
James
Leslie Danks
I agree, but in cases like this the word is a noun rather than an
imprecation. I offer an example of road rage as an illustration: during the
sixties, whilst living in Cambridge, Mass., I was rather slow driving away
when the traffic lights turned green, and responded to the impatient hoot
from behind with a gesture of contempt. At the next traffic lights (it was
rush hour), the driver from behind knocked on the window of my car and
asked, aggressively, "You gotta lot of balls, buddy?" A man's gotta do what
a man's gotta do. I locked the car door and spent a few nervous minutes
waiting for the lights to turn green again.
--
Les (BrE)
Glenn Knickerbocker
> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
From what I can tell, "Oh, snap!" seems to fit the bill nowadays.
ŹR
John Dean
Fuckin A, Chuck
--
John Dean
Oxford
Dr Peter Young
[snip]
> From my prior post, "Maybe it would be easier to make a list of
> exclamations that aren't minced oaths, that aren't euphemisms for
> profanity or scatology, and are just polite, secular interjections.
> Can anyone think of any?"
In this family, it has been the custom just to say, "Rude words!"
With best wishes,
Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Damaeus
annily <ann...@annily.invalid> posted:
> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for crying
> out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same boat.
Me neither. And I've used "for crying out loud" simply because I hear
everyone else say it. I never knew its connection to Christ. As for
"criminy", I just assumed it was a contraction and slight rearrangement of
"Jiminy Cricket".
I wonder about someone who knows the "for crying out loud" connection to
Christ. Does he hear someone say "for crying out loud" and automatically
assume the person using the utterance is scared to say "Jesus Christ"?
Damaeus
Damaeus
"Frank ess" <fr...@fshe2fs.com> posted:
> Steve Hayes wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:12:12 +1030, annily <ann...@annily.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for
> >> crying out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same
> >> boat.
> >
> > "Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a
> > bucket".
>
> In mid-1940s South Los Angeles my colorful neighbor said
> "Crime-a-nettles!" or Crim-a-netley!"
I've heard older women say "Hell's Bells".
> That's the place and time I was punished for shouting "G-O-D dammit!"
> I suppose I must have thought the "bad" word was the deity name and
> wouldn't be held accountable if it were spelled out.
I always thought that God wouldn't be so petty as to care if someone said
"God dammit", and it was just some human quirk arrived at through the
assumption that God must be an asshole if he has the balls to rule the
universe. But as I see it, if God rules the universe, he was born that
way and can't help it. Since he cannot be removed from that position, he
certainly wouldn't be offended, nor threatened, by someone's use of "god
dammit (damnit)", or any other version.
Damaeus
Damaeus
"Maria Conlon" <conlo...@sbcglobal.net> posted:
> And my mother-in-law used the phrase "Cheese and rice and all his
> apostles."
I like "Big Daddy, Junior and the Spook" as a comical substitution for
"Father, Son and Holy Ghost".
Damaeus
Damaeus
"Ray O'Hara" <raymon...@hotmail.com> posted:
> "mm" <NOPSAM...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:7judp519prfpeg30g...@4ax.com...
> >I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
> > "Christ".**
> >
> > What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>
> Fucken A! is common.
It's always kind if irritated me the way people substitute "close
substitutions" for outright cuss words:
fudge instead of fuck
farck instead of fuck
freakin' instead of fuckin'
shoot instead of shit
To me, hearing the substitution is annoying. I'd rather just hear the
cuss word, not because I get off on hearing them, but because hearing the
substitution makes me feel like I'm trapped in a room full of kindergarten
teachers.
Damaeus
Glenn Knickerbocker
> Did Yikes! originate with Scooby Doo? the Oxford American mumble mumble
> is OS X says its origins are unknown, but lists it from the 1970's
M-W says 1957.
ŹR
Glenn Knickerbocker
I wouldn't say anybody approved of anything in an exchange like this:
"That's fucked up, man."
"Fuckin' A it is."
ŹR
John Dean
Is the second speaker not approving the first speaker's discernment and
judgement?
--
John Dean
Oxford
HVS
Even that's surprising; I'd have guessed it went with what I'd think of as
early 20thC stuff like "crikey", "egad", "crumbs", and "oopsy-daisy".
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
mm
<no-...@damaeus.yahoo.invalid> wrote:
>Reading from news:alt.english.usage,
>"Ray O'Hara" <raymon...@hotmail.com> posted:
>
>> "mm" <NOPSAM...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>> news:7judp519prfpeg30g...@4ax.com...
>> >I assume there is no doubt that "criminy" is a way of avoiding saying
>> > "Christ".**
>> >
>> > What about "For crying out loud"? Is that the same thing?**
>>
>> Fucken A! is common.
>
>It's always kind if irritated me the way people substitute "close
>substitutions" for outright cuss words:
>
>fudge instead of fuck
>farck instead of fuck
>freakin' instead of fuckin'
>shoot instead of shit
>
>To me, hearing the substitution is annoying.
Yes, I'm glad you brought this up.
Substitutions that call up images of the word avoided are just as
vulgar, just as low-class, as the original terms. The idea of
propriety is to not talk about certain topics, like excrement. The
idea is to not call it to the minds of listeners who are presumed to
not want to think about such things. And many people don't want to
think about such things.
However, so far I have exceptions. For me, some words like shoot and
shucks, which I heard for 10 or 15 years as a child without ever
hearing any other word or knowing that there was any word for which
they were substitions, don't call up images of any other word, and
even since I've known about the relationship, I still don't think they
call up images in other people.
> I'd rather just hear the
>cuss word, not because I get off on hearing them, but because hearing the
>substitution makes me feel like I'm trapped in a room full of kindergarten
>teachers.
>
>Damaeus
--
Glenn Knickerbocker
> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
>> I wouldn't say anybody approved of anything in an exchange like this:
>> "That's fucked up, man."
>> "Fuckin' A it is."
> Is the second speaker not approving the first speaker's discernment and
> judgement?
No. The "it is" says he didn't have to be told--"you know that I know
that you know." He's deriding the first guy's statement of the obvious
or complicity in the fuckup.
ŹR
Peter Moylan
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Jerry Friedman
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:14:10 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
>
>
>
> >Chuck Riggs <chri...@eircom.net> writes:
>
> >> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:59:00 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman
>
> >>>mm wrote:
> >>>[...]
> >>>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>
>
> >> "Balls!", "damn!".
>
> >"Fuck", "shit", and "damn" work in both positive and negative
> >situations, but "balls" seems to be strictly negative. (Then again, I
> >haven't heard it much.)
>
> exclamations that aren't minced oaths, that aren't euphemisms for
> profanity or scatology, and are just polite, secular interjections.
>
> Can anyone think of any?"
Sockdolager!
Good!
Too bad!
Boo sucks! (Maybe.)
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
> On 03/11/2010 09:46 AM, Chuck Riggs wrote:
>
> > wrote:
> >>means something like "You've got that right!" or "That's correct."
> > How are those not terms of approbation, or approval as I call it?
>
> I wouldn't say anybody approved of anything in an exchange like this:
>
> "That's fucked up, man."
> "Fuckin' A it is."
But, as you explained it, that's a special case.
I often hear "That's fucked up" as a term of approval, though probably
less often than as a term of disapproval. People, at least young men,
say it to approve of a funny insult, something enjoyably strange or
disgusting, or the like.
--
Jerry Friedman
Damaeus
Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> posted:
> In message <c8nip51hkbu9t81i8...@4ax.com>
> Not The Big Bobber, Ritchie Valens, and Buddy?
>
> or Neal Cassady, Jack Kerouac, and Allen Ginsberg?
I don't see the relationships of those people to the Trinity of the Big
Three.
Damaeus
Jerry Friedman
> In message <ltmip5dhptlshtp609rtl2i3u9llfm2...@4ax.com>
> evade the second commandment or the anti-blasphmemy laws.
>
> Although I did met an overly religious couple in my youth who considered
> just about any word starting with a hard G to be a curse. I remember
> being admonished for Geez, Gosh, and Golly. Thankfully, I wasn't around
> them for any length of time.
>
> But nowadays? Outside of word-geeks? Hard pressed, I think.
I sometimes hear "Oh my gosh" in circumstances where it sounds to me
like a deliberate euphemism. I agree with you about "Jiminy Cricket"
and probably "for crying out loud". Actually, I'll bet the majority
of Americans don't know "Jiminy Cricket" except as a cartoon
character.
--
Jerry Friedman
Al in St. Lou
> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
>> mm wrote:
>>> I want a general almost all-purpose exclamation.
>
> Now, that's an everyday exclamation that's heard everywhere by everyone
> save me.
I've only ever heard Hugh Laurie say it, and then only as an
American character.
--
Al in St. Lou
Jeffrey Turner
> Reading from news:alt.english.usage,
> "Frank ess" <fr...@fshe2fs.com> posted:
>
>> Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:12:12 +1030, annily <ann...@annily.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for
>>>> crying out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same
>>>> boat.
>>> "Criminy" I've never heard of, but I do say "for crying in a
>>> bucket".
>> In mid-1940s South Los Angeles my colorful neighbor said
>> "Crime-a-nettles!" or Crim-a-netley!"
>
> I've heard older women say "Hell's Bells".
Now maybe. I doubt it would have been heard in the '40s.
"In olden days a bit of stocking was looked on as something shocking,
now heaven knows, anything goes."
--Jeff
--
Love consists of overestimating
the differences between one woman
and another. --George Bernard Shaw
Jeffrey Turner
It may have originated with the children's TV network, Nickelodeon.
mm
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>In message <ivthp59pvq5lplm5f...@4ax.com>
> Chuck <chr...@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:24:06 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
>> <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>>>Cece <ceceliaa...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> <snip>
>
>>>> What about "by Jove"?
>>>
>>>That one appears to have always been a reference to Jove (i.e.,
>>>Jupiter, which etymologically came from "Jovis-pater") rather than a
>>>minced oath for a Christian deity. I'd assume based on such use in
>>>pre-Christian Roman texts. The OED cites "Jove" to ca. 1374 and "By
>>>Jove" to 1575.
>
>> It is only by coincidence, then, that Jupiter, Jove and Jesus start
>> with the same letter,
>
>Yes. Although it is possible (though completely unprovable) that it has
>endured for this reason.
>
>> "By Mars", for example, not being a common oath?
>
>No, Romans swore their oaths to Jupiter.
Didn't Perry White reference Jupiter? The publisher of the Daily
Planet, in Metropolis.
Reinhold {Rey} Aman
>
memory. About 20 years ago, there was a TV comedy show in which two
black Winan (sp?) brothers performed sketches. One of them (tall,
shaved head) played a campy, witty, sassy-talking gay character who
repeatedly used "Oh, snap!" or a similar exclamation with "snap" while
snapping his fingers. That's the only time I've ever heard it.
--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
R H Draney
That was "In Living Color", starring Damon Wayans and (in the sketch in
question) fellow cast member David Alan Grier...I don't remember "Oh, snap!"
used in that way, but rather "two snaps up!" in imitation of Siskel & Ebert's
"two thumbs up" whenever they approved of something....
Here's the first appearance of the bit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWdL9mrYNmQ
I first started hearing "Oh, snap!" on a recurring basis, meaning "I'm
unpleasantly surprised by this turn of events", from the character of Joy (Jamie
Pressley) on "My Name Is Earl", quite a few years after "In Living Color"....r
--
"Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly."
- Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
R H Draney
>
>Didn't Perry White reference Jupiter? The publisher of the Daily
>Planet, in Metropolis.
No, his catchphrase was "Great Caesar's ghost!"...I think there was once a
storyline in which someone actually brought Caesar's ghost back to life and
Perry interacted with him; you might be remembering him talking to someone in a
toga....r
sjde...@yahoo.com
> In message <ltmip5dhptlshtp609rtl2i3u9llfm2...@4ax.com>
>
> > Reading from news:alt.english.usage,
> >> I knew "criminy" was a probably corruption of "Christ", but "for crying
> >> out loud" had never occurred to me as being in the same boat.
> > everyone else say it. I never knew its connection to Christ. As for
> > "criminy", I just assumed it was a contraction and slight rearrangement of
> > "Jiminy Cricket".
> > I wonder about someone who knows the "for crying out loud" connection to
> > Christ. Does he hear someone say "for crying out loud" and automatically
> > assume the person using the utterance is scared to say "Jesus Christ"?
>
> I think very few people know that any of these phrases were attempts to
> evade the second commandment or the anti-blasphmemy laws.
>
> Although I did met an overly religious couple in my youth who considered
> just about any word starting with a hard G to be a curse. I remember
> being admonished for Geez, Gosh, and Golly. Thankfully, I wasn't around
> them for any length of time.
Does "Geez" begin with a hard G for you?
(I'm not insinuating that it does, merely curious given the context)
Steve Hayes
>Does "Geez" begin with a hard G for you?
If it's referring to what a geezer does.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter Moylan
Peter Moylan
> It's always kind if irritated me the way people substitute "close
> substitutions" for outright cuss words:
>
> fudge instead of fuck
> farck instead of fuck
> freakin' instead of fuckin'
> shoot instead of shit
>
> To me, hearing the substitution is annoying. I'd rather just hear the
> cuss word, not because I get off on hearing them, but because hearing the
> substitution makes me feel like I'm trapped in a room full of kindergarten
> teachers.
Fuck'n' A.
Nick Spalding
<SpqdnS5iI-1iVQTW...@posted.localnet>
on Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:54:20 -0500:
> Damaeus wrote:
> >
> > I've heard older women say "Hell's Bells".
>
> Now maybe. I doubt it would have been heard in the '40s.
Whatever about older women my father certainly said it in those days,
often extended to "Hell's Bells and buckets of flaming blood".
> "In olden days a bit of stocking was looked on as something shocking,
> now heaven knows, anything goes."
>
> --Jeff
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE