Slight Pondian Deviations
MC
between AmE and BrE.
Examples:
hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
eating
Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
contrex
> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
> between AmE and BrE.
>
> Examples:
>
> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
Both these exist in BrE, The hokey-cokey is a dance, hokey-pokey is
ice cream.
> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
"Deviation", perhaps?
MC
<7a2d6e89-8d89-41b6...@30g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
contrex <mike.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 Oct, 16:47, MC <copes...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
> > I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
> > between AmE and BrE.
> >
> > Examples:
> >
> > hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>
>
> Both these exist in BrE, The hokey-cokey is a dance, hokey-pokey is
> ice cream.
Didn't know that. Thanks.
>
>
> > Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>
> "Deviation", perhaps?
Probably. I suppose I was hoping for a single word that applies only to
linguistic deviations.
HVS
> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
> between AmE and BrE.
>
> Examples:
>
> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>
> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating
If you're making a list, add titbit/tidbit...
> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
Don't know the technical term; I'd call them variations rather than
deviations.
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
"Natural language". In this case "English".
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Andrew B.
> On 2 Oct, 16:47, MC <copes...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
> > I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
> > between AmE and BrE.
>
> > Examples:
>
> > hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>
> Both these exist in BrE, The hokey-cokey is a dance, hokey-pokey is
> ice cream.
Is it? I've never heard that.
Wikipedia describes Hokey Pokey as a popular flavour of ice cream in
New Zealand, and a dated slang term for ice cream in Britain and New
York.
Pat Durkin
"MC" <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote in message
news:copespaz-4EC806...@news.eternal-september.org...
> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and
> sayings
> between AmE and BrE.
>
> Examples:
>
> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>
> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating
>
> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>
statement.
I hear both in the US.
Thus, I need more than just the one pair for drawing any kind of
theory or speculation.
Prai Jei
> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
> between AmE and BrE.
>
> Examples:
>
> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>
> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating
>
> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
Gradual corruption.
Hokey-cokey is a garble of "Hoc est corpus meus" ("This is my body"), the
high point of the Catholic Mass so is the "correct" version. Never heard of
hokey pokey, though "pokey" alone, often followed up with "little", has the
meaning of "impossibly small" referring to a room, house or flat
(apartment).
(Does putting your left leg in, etc. and shaking it all about, come from the
same source?)
As for the pudding, the second version is the correct one - however nice a
pudding looks, its real value is whether it tastes good too so it must be
eaten before a verdict can be given.
--
ξ:) Proud to be curly
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
MC
"Pat Durkin" <durk...@msn.com> wrote:
I see.
Prai Jei
continuum:
> Wikipedia describes Hokey Pokey as a popular flavour of ice cream in
> New Zealand, and a dated slang term for ice cream in Britain and New
> York.
Never heard of it in current BrE so I agree with "dated". :),C>
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
OED:
hokey-pokey
slang or colloq.
[In sense 1, altered from hocus-pocus; in sense 2, perh. of distinct
origin.]
1. (Cf. HOCUS-POCUS 2.) Deception, cheatery, underhand work.
2. A cheap kind of ice-cream, sold by street vendors.
1884...
....
1888 Pall Mall Gazette 25 Sept. 3/2 The correct origin of the term
'Hokey Pokey, a penny a lump'. [An incident is related as tending to
identify the term with the It. O che poco! 'O how little!']
Maybe, maybe not.
MC
Prai Jei <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> MC set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time continuum:
>
> > I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
> > between AmE and BrE.
> >
> > Examples:
> >
> > hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
> >
> > the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
> > eating
> >
> > Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>
> Gradual corruption.
>
> Hokey-cokey is a garble of "Hoc est corpus meus" ("This is my body"), the
> high point of the Catholic Mass
Never heard that derivation before - fascinating!
>ﾊso is the "correct" version.
>ﾊNever heard of hokey pokey,
It's pretty standard in the US and Canada for the dance and the song
that goes with it. I've never heard Hokey Cokey on this side of the pond.
<SNIP>
>
> As for the pudding, the second version is the correct one - however nice a
> pudding looks, its real value is whether it tastes good too so it must be
> eaten before a verdict can be given.
Well yes... and no.
The proof is still "in the pudding" either way.
MC
Prai Jei <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Never heard of it in current BrE so I agree with "dated". :),C>
"I've never heard of X" is anecdotal. The plural of anecdote isn't data!
contrex
> Never heard of it in current BrE so I agree with "dated". :),C>
My mother used to talk about the Italian "hokey-pokey man" who used to
visit her street in Camberwell, south London, in the 1920s, so I
suppose some people might say it was a little dated.
Ray O'Hara
The hokey-pokey is a dance in the US.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E5F2iDg0FU]
Dr Peter Young
> In article <i87pjf$3p7$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Prai Jei <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> Hokey-cokey is a garble of "Hoc est corpus meus" ("This is my body"), the
>> high point of the Catholic Mass
> Never heard that derivation before - fascinating!
>>?so is the "correct" version.
>>?Never heard of hokey pokey,
> It's pretty standard in the US and Canada for the dance and the song
> that goes with it. I've never heard Hokey Cokey on this side of the pond.
If he or she had a suspicious mind, hokey pokey might sound mildly
obscene to a Rightpondian.
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
contrex
my mother saying "Such a wery nice man, 'oo sold the 'okey-pokey. Mind
you he liked the vimmen. My sister used to run down four pair-'o-stair
ven she 'eard his cry."
Robin Bignall
wrote:
>In article <i87pjf$3p7$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Prai Jei <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> MC set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time continuum:
>>
>> > I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
>> > between AmE and BrE.
>> >
[..]
>> As for the pudding, the second version is the correct one - however nice a
>> pudding looks, its real value is whether it tastes good too so it must be
>> eaten before a verdict can be given.
>
>Well yes... and no.
>
>The proof is still "in the pudding" either way.
Actually it isn't. The proof (of whether the pudding is any good) is
in the eating of it. I always took it to mean something like "All
that glisters is not gold".
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England
Pat Durkin
"Dr Peter Young" <pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7aad0a605...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk...
> On 2 Oct 2010 MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <i87pjf$3p7$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Prai Jei <pvstownse...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Hokey-cokey is a garble of "Hoc est corpus meus" ("This is my
>>> body"), the
>>> high point of the Catholic Mass
>
>> Never heard that derivation before - fascinating!
>
>>>?so is the "correct" version.
>
>>>?Never heard of hokey pokey,
>
>> It's pretty standard in the US and Canada for the dance and the
>> song
>> that goes with it. I've never heard Hokey Cokey on this side of the
>> pond.
>
> If he or she had a suspicious mind, hokey pokey might sound mildly
> obscene to a Rightpondian.
Well, the initials are there for a bit of hanky-panky.
Garrett Wollman
Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>Actually it isn't. The proof (of whether the pudding is any good) is
>in the eating of it.
Note that the sense of "proof" in the saying is the historic one of
"test", not the modern one of "demonstrate the truth of a statement
using logic". (This is the same "proof" as is referenced when stating
the strength of alcoholic spirits and when making yeast breads.)
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
MC
Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > I don't recognize a variation between countries in the "pudding"
> > statement.
> > I hear both in the US.
>
> Really? I think of myself as AmE with strong BrE influences and I don't
> think I've ever heard the eating variation outside BBC television.
Nor I.
MC
> >The proof is still "in the pudding" either way.
>
> Actually it isn't. The proof (of whether the pudding is any good) is
> in the eating of it. I always took it to mean something like "All
> that glisters is not gold".
For the longest time I would have agreed with your stand, and I
certainly prefer it, but if one can speak of an abstract concept having
a physical location, then the proof is located in the pudding - if you
see what I mean.
MC
<097bcd62-6410-4831...@c10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
contrex <mike.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm a bit lost - was/is "hokey-pokey" a term that described all ice
cream or one particular brand or style of ice cream?
Evan Kirshenbaum
> MC set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time continuum:
>
>> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
>> between AmE and BrE.
>>
>> Examples:
>>
>> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>
>> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>> eating
>>
>> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>
> Gradual corruption.
>
> Hokey-cokey is a garble of "Hoc est corpus meus" ("This is my
> body"), the high point of the Catholic Mass so is the "correct"
> version.
That's the derivation I've heard for "hocus pocus", although the OED
says that that "notion ... rests merely on a [1694] conjecture by
Tillotson". They derive "hokey-cokey", cited to 1966 (1943 as "cokey
cokey" and objecting to "hokey-pokey") from "hokee-pokee" (a dance),
cited to 1873, which came from "hokey-pokey", cited to the middle of
the 19th century as "deception" (from "hocus pocus") and 1884 as "a
cheap kind of ice-cream".
> Never heard of hokey pokey,
It's the standard American name for the dance. Apparently it was a
dance craze (under that name) in 1950.
> though "pokey" alone, often followed up with "little", has the
> meaning of "impossibly small" referring to a room, house or flat
> (apartment).
Around here, "pokey" is most likely to mean "slow", from "slowpoke".
The OED derives this from subsense 3 of noun sense 3 of "poke".
Unfortunately, noun sense 3 of poke has no subsenses. Sense 3 is
[Attn Jesse Sheidlower: OED possible mistake]
A plant (of uncertain identity) used by North American Indians for
smoking; the dried leaves of this plant.
> (Does putting your left leg in, etc. and shaking it all about, come
> from the same source?)
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If only some crazy scientist
SF Bay Area (1982-) |somewhere would develop a device
Chicago (1964-1982) |that would allow us to change the
|channel on our televisions......
evan.kir...@gmail.com | --"lazarus"
R H Draney
>
>In message <i87oiv$nfh$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>> news:copespaz-4EC806...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>>> eating
>>>
>>> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>>>
>> statement.
>> I hear both in the US.
>
>Really? I think of myself as AmE with strong BrE influences and I don't
>think I've ever heard the eating variation outside BBC television.
That would just be gilding the lily....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Pat Durkin
"Lewis" <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote in message
news:slrniaf8ak....@ibook-g4.local...
>> news:copespaz-4EC806...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and
>>> sayings
>>> between AmE and BrE.
>>>
>>> Examples:
>>>
>>> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>>
>>> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>>> eating
>>>
>>> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they
>>> deviate?
>>>
>> I don't recognize a variation between countries in the "pudding"
>> statement.
>> I hear both in the US.
>
> don't
> think I've ever heard the eating variation outside BBC television.
>
>
> And now, the rest of the story
In fact, though I don't wish to look it up, and don't know when was
the last time I heard or saw it, I learned the "eating" version before
I ever learned the shorter form.
I think of the shorter form as being more recent, and as being spoken
tongue in cheek by some people in recognition of its elliptical state.
Maybe those people are my age, and not on TV or radio all (of) the
time.
Donna Richoux
> In article
> <097bcd62-6410-4831...@c10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> contrex <mike.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't think "hokey-pokey" is at all old-fashioned. I can still hear
> > my mother saying "Such a wery nice man, 'oo sold the 'okey-pokey. Mind
> > you he liked the vimmen. My sister used to run down four pair-'o-stair
> > ven she 'eard his cry."
>
> I'm a bit lost - was/is "hokey-pokey" a term that described all ice
> cream or one particular brand or style of ice cream?
I think contrex was trying to be funny.
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>> > hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>
>> Both these exist in BrE, The hokey-cokey is a dance, hokey-pokey is
>> ice cream.
>
>Is it? I've never heard that.
>
>Wikipedia describes Hokey Pokey as a popular flavour of ice cream in
>New Zealand, and a dated slang term for ice cream in Britain and New
>York.
I thought the hokey pokey was what it was all about.]
--
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
Steve Hayes
I would regard "the proof is in the pudding" as a simple error.
R H Draney
>
>I would regard "the proof is in the pudding" as a simple error.
Simple, for all that it alters the entire meaning of the bromide....
A truly simple error would be that which results in someone saying that "the pig
is involved; the chicken is committed", as a former pointy-haired boss of mine
once said...(this is the same PHB who could never get the whole "walk the
walk/talk the talk" expression to come out in any sensible form)....r
R H Draney
>
>"Proof is in the pudding": 1.8 million hits
>"proof of the pudding is in the eating": 41,600 hits
And yet:
"proof of the soap is in the eating": zero hits
Don't people read Socrates any more?...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsV_1ThIThA
Ian Noble
<bul...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2 Oct, 17:07, contrex <mike.j.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2 Oct, 16:47, MC <copes...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
>> > between AmE and BrE.
>>
>> > Examples:
>>
>> > hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>
>> Both these exist in BrE, The hokey-cokey is a dance, hokey-pokey is
>> ice cream.
>
>Is it? I've never heard that.
>
>Wikipedia describes Hokey Pokey as a popular flavour of ice cream in
>New Zealand, and a dated slang term for ice cream in Britain and New
>York.
I've never met it in the wild, but for that very reason I noticed and
remember the phrase "a hokey-pokey ice cream" regularly being used in
the Basil Brush show (BBC, 1960's onwards) by the eponymous puppet.
Cheers - Ian
(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)
Ian Noble
wrote:
>On 02 Oct 2010, MC wrote
>
>> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
>> between AmE and BrE.
>>
>> Examples:
>>
>> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>
>> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>> eating
>
>If you're making a list, add titbit/tidbit...
>
>> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>
>Don't know the technical term; I'd call them variations rather than
>deviations.
In the case you've added, the term is "prudery".
MC
Ian Noble <ipn...@offspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:
I wonder which came first.
According to Merriam Webster the first known use of "tidbit" is circa
1640.
Steve Hayes
>Steve Hayes filted:
>>
>>I would regard "the proof is in the pudding" as a simple error.
>
>Simple, for all that it alters the entire meaning of the bromide....
Eh? We use pixels now.
>A truly simple error would be that which results in someone saying that "the pig
>is involved; the chicken is committed", as a former pointy-haired boss of mine
>once said...(this is the same PHB who could never get the whole "walk the
>walk/talk the talk" expression to come out in any sensible form)....r
It's like "another thing coming" -- failing to understand the meaning, and so
subtituting something with similar words, but no meaning.
Steve Hayes
>
>In message <860ga651qsvd2295a...@4ax.com>
> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 12:02:08 -0500, "Pat Durkin" <durk...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>"MC" <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote in message
>>>news:copespaz-4EC806...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and
>>>> sayings
>>>> between AmE and BrE.
>>>>
>>>> Examples:
>>>>
>>>> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>>>
>>>> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>>>> eating
>>>>
>>>> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>>>>
>>>I don't recognize a variation between countries in the "pudding"
>>>statement.
>>> I hear both in the US.
>>>Thus, I need more than just the one pair for drawing any kind of
>>>theory or speculation.
>
>> I would regard "the proof is in the pudding" as a simple error.
>
>
>"Proof is in the pudding": 1.8 million hits
>"proof of the pudding is in the eating": 41,600 hits
Much more widespread than I thought, then.
Must be a lot of hair-brained people around combing their teeth.
Roland Hutchinson
All right, then: not prudery, but Puritanism.
--
Roland Hutchinson
He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba,"
... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy.
--Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ )
MC
Roland Hutchinson <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >If you're making a list, add titbit/tidbit...
> >> >
> >> >> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
> >> >
> >> >Don't know the technical term; I'd call them variations rather than
> >> >deviations.
> >>
> >> In the case you've added, the term is "prudery".
> >
> > I wonder which came first.
> >
> > According to Merriam Webster the first known use of "tidbit" is circa
> > 1640.
>
> All right, then: not prudery, but Puritanism.
Could well be. I looked around for an earlier citation of "titbit" but
didn't come across one.
Robin Bignall
wrote:
I do see, but the proof stays hidden in the pudding, as it were, until
it's eaten. Possibly a culinary version of Schroedinger's Cat.
MC
Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:28:14 -0400, MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <kj4fa6tijrj5pp7te...@4ax.com>,
> > Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >The proof is still "in the pudding" either way.
> >>
> >> Actually it isn't. The proof (of whether the pudding is any good) is
> >> in the eating of it. I always took it to mean something like "All
> >> that glisters is not gold".
> >
> >For the longest time I would have agreed with your stand, and I
> >certainly prefer it, but if one can speak of an abstract concept having
> >a physical location, then the proof is located in the pudding - if you
> >see what I mean.
>
> I do see, but the proof stays hidden in the pudding, as it were, until
> it's eaten. Possibly a culinary version of Schroedinger's Cat.
Exactly what I meant.
Mack A. Damia
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>In message <87rha6pvm61hkjmdk...@4ax.com>
>It doesn't matter when it's known, it's still in the pudding.
Yes, blood and lard, as we said.
Pay attention in the back.
Snidely
> In article <87rha6pvm61hkjmdk7g9ic5f3aak5kh...@4ax.com>,
> Robin Bignall <docro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:28:14 -0400, MC <copes...@mapca.inter.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >In article <kj4fa6tijrj5pp7teq2k20hrf992psv...@4ax.com>,
> > > Robin Bignall <docro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >The proof is still "in the pudding" either way.
>
> > >> Actually it isn't. The proof (of whether the pudding is any good) is
> > >> in the eating of it. I always took it to mean something like "All
> > >> that glisters is not gold".
>
> > >For the longest time I would have agreed with your stand, and I
> > >certainly prefer it, but if one can speak of an abstract concept having
> > >a physical location, then the proof is located in the pudding - if you
> > >see what I mean.
>
> > I do see, but the proof stays hidden in the pudding, as it were, until
> > it's eaten. Possibly a culinary version of Schroedinger's Cat.
>
> Exactly what I meant.
And you can't eat the pudding before it's made, and you can't make it
without the ingredients ...
Did I just go off the deep end here?
/dps
MC
<d389556d-c634-4046...@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And you can't eat the pudding before it's made, and you can't make it
> without the ingredients ...
>
> Did I just go off the deep end here?
The proof of the pudding is in the supermarket.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> In article <b9sga6dk512pkqle6...@4ax.com>,
> Ian Noble <ipn...@offspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:12:41 +0100, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On 02 Oct 2010, MC wrote
>> >
>> >If you're making a list, add titbit/tidbit...
>> >
>> >> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they
>> >> deviate?
>> >
>> >Don't know the technical term; I'd call them variations rather
>> >than deviations.
>>
>> In the case you've added, the term is "prudery".
>
> I wonder which came first.
>
> According to Merriam Webster the first known use of "tidbit" is
> circa 1640.
The OED cites "tyd bit" to ca. 1640 and "tit-bit" to 1694. So no
clear winner, but evidence leaning toward "tidbit" being the older.
They derive it from "tid", although they don't cite this until 1727
and all of the quotations are references to or plays on "tidbit".
Johnson, in 1755, derives it from "Saxon" _tydder_, which the OED
notes that his etymology is untenable.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |There is no such thing as bad data,
SF Bay Area (1982-) |only data from bad homes.
Chicago (1964-1982)
MC
Evan Kirshenbaum <evan.kir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> writes:
>
> > In article <b9sga6dk512pkqle6...@4ax.com>,
> > Ian Noble <ipn...@offspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:12:41 +0100, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 02 Oct 2010, MC wrote
> >> >
> >> >If you're making a list, add titbit/tidbit...
> >> >
> >> >> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they
> >> >> deviate?
> >> >
> >> >Don't know the technical term; I'd call them variations rather
> >> >than deviations.
> >>
> >> In the case you've added, the term is "prudery".
> >
> > I wonder which came first.
> >
> > According to Merriam Webster the first known use of "tidbit" is
> > circa 1640.
>
> The OED cites "tyd bit" to ca. 1640 and "tit-bit" to 1694. So no
> clear winner, but evidence leaning toward "tidbit" being the older.
> They derive it from "tid", although they don't cite this until 1727
> and all of the quotations are references to or plays on "tidbit".
> Johnson, in 1755, derives it from "Saxon" _tydder_, which the OED
> notes that his etymology is untenable.
I therefore suspect it's simply a case of the same word having more than
one spelling in an era when spelling wasn't standardized.
Robert Bannister
>
> In message <860ga651qsvd2295a...@4ax.com> Steve Hayes
> <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> "MC" <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote in message
>>> news:copespaz-4EC806...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and
>>>> sayings
>>>> between AmE and BrE.
>>>>
>>>> Examples:
>>>>
>>>> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>>>
>>>> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>>>> eating
>>>>
>>>> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>>>>
>>> I don't recognize a variation between countries in the "pudding"
>>> statement.
>>> I hear both in the US.
>>> Thus, I need more than just the one pair for drawing any kind of
>>> theory or speculation.
>
>> I would regard "the proof is in the pudding" as a simple error.
>
>
>
>
Thus, by tasting the google pudding, we find to our complete amazement
that most Usenet users are either ignorant or stupid.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
My favourite is Zungenwurst, which is a blood sausage with tongue in it.
Very yummy.
--
Rob Bannister
Mack A. Damia
'
I love tongue.
Did you ever have souse or headcheese?
(Hint: it's not cheese)
Pickled tripe, as well.
Isn't this an offal subject?
Mack A. Damia
Three bricks shy of a full load.
MC
Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> My favourite is Zungenwurst, which is a blood sausage with tongue in it.
> Very yummy.
Rather you than me! I used to get tongue in school lunches (invariably
called "dinners" at that time in the UK) and I loathe the taste and
texture...
Roland Hutchinson
Probably tastes like chicken, that.
MC
Roland Hutchinson <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 21:53:38 +0100, Robin Bignall wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:28:14 -0400, MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
> >
> >>In article <kj4fa6tijrj5pp7te...@4ax.com>,
> >> Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> >The proof is still "in the pudding" either way.
> >>>
> >>> Actually it isn't. The proof (of whether the pudding is any good) is
> >>> in the eating of it. I always took it to mean something like "All
> >>> that glisters is not gold".
> >>
> >>For the longest time I would have agreed with your stand, and I
> >>certainly prefer it, but if one can speak of an abstract concept having
> >>a physical location, then the proof is located in the pudding - if you
> >>see what I mean.
> >
> > I do see, but the proof stays hidden in the pudding, as it were, until
> > it's eaten. Possibly a culinary version of Schroedinger's Cat.
>
> Probably tastes like chicken, that.
Ha!
Roland Hutchinson
I reason as follows:
Dressed cat is supposed to be virtually indistinguishable from rabbit,
which, we are told, is why rabbit otherwise ready to cook is or was
traditionally sold with the unskinned paws still attached. So cat must
taste like rabbit, and we all know what rabbit tastes like, especially
those of us who have eaten it.
Steve Hayes
Mack A. Damia
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 18:37:24 -0700, Mack A. Damia <mybaco...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 09:26:39 +0800, Robert Bannister
>><rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 3/10/10 1:44 PM, Lewis wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In message <860ga651qsvd2295a...@4ax.com> Steve Hayes
>>>> <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> I would regard "the proof is in the pudding" as a simple error.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Proof is in the pudding": 1.8 million hits
>>>> "proof of the pudding is in the eating": 41,600 hits
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Thus, by tasting the google pudding, we find to our complete amazement
>>>that most Usenet users are either ignorant or stupid.
>>
>>Three bricks shy of a full load.
>
>More like 2997.
"A few sandwiches short of a picnic basket", is another one.
"Playing with a deck of fifty-one".
"Three bricks shy of a (full) load" is a term you here in western
Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Maybe elsewhere.
There was a book entitled "Three Bricks Shy of a Load" about the
Pittsburgh Steelers published in 1973.
Roland Hutchinson
> In message <i8bl34$7ve$4...@news.eternal-september.org>
> I've had rabbit a few times. I don't think it tastes anything like
> chicken. At all.
>
> And while I'm hear, neither does rattlesnake, alligator, or crocodile.
You are obviously a person of exquisite taste.
Mack A. Damia
<my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> And while I'm here, neither does rattlesnake, alligator, or crocodile.
>
>You are obviously a person of exquisite taste.
Had cream of kangaroo tail soup in Hawaii in 1969.
Tasted like dirt and I scowled a bit. The waiter apologetically
poured a thimbleful of sherry wine into it.
Then it tasted like dirt with a hint of sherry.
rwalker
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>A truly simple error would be that which results in someone saying that "the pig
>>is involved; the chicken is committed", as a former pointy-haired boss of mine
>>once said...(this is the same PHB who could never get the whole "walk the
>>walk/talk the talk" expression to come out in any sensible form)....r
>
>It's like "another thing coming" -- failing to understand the meaning, and so
>subtituting something with similar words, but no meaning.
When I was a child, I always thought it was "another thing coming,"
and that _thing_ was usually a swift kick to the rear. The
misunderstood version made much more literal sense to me than the
correct "another think."
R H Draney
>
>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 06:58:35 +0200, Steve Hayes
><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 18:37:24 -0700, Mack A. Damia <mybaco...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>More like 2997.
>
>"A few sandwiches short of a picnic basket", is another one.
>
>"Playing with a deck of fifty-one".
>
>"Three bricks shy of a (full) load" is a term you here in western
>Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Maybe elsewhere.
"A taco short of a combination plate."
"The lights are on, but nobody's home."
"Her elevator don't go all the way to the top floor."
"Body by Fisher; Brains by Mattel."
"Mind like a steel sieve."
"Couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel."
....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
R H Draney
>
>In message <i8bl34$7ve$4...@news.eternal-september.org>
> Roland Hutchinson <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Dressed cat is supposed to be virtually indistinguishable from rabbit,
>> which, we are told, is why rabbit otherwise ready to cook is or was
>> traditionally sold with the unskinned paws still attached. So cat must
>> taste like rabbit, and we all know what rabbit tastes like, especially
>> those of us who have eaten it.
>
>I've had rabbit a few times. I don't think it tastes anything like
>chicken. At all.
I had it regularly during the first ten years of my life (and not, regrettably,
in the intervening forty)...maybe it's just the way it was prepared, but I
thought they were nearly indistinguishable....
Frog tasted like chicken too....
>And while I'm hear, neither does rattlesnake, alligator, or crocodile.
Never had crocodile, but I'm with you on the other two...surprisingly, ostrich
tastes nothing like chicken either....r
Mack A. Damia
Thanks, I was trying to think of more!
Dr Peter Young
"Couldn't organise a punch-up in an Irish pub". Or is that now non-PC?
Peter.
--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
Steve Hayes
Since discussing it here, I've noticed that I quite frequently make typos of
"thing" for "think", and not only in the context of that saying.
Pat Durkin
"Lewis" <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote in message
news:slrniaithd....@ibook-g4.local...
> In message <i8bpc0$u41$4...@news.eternal-september.org>
>
> OTOH, I really need to get to bed. I've made several horrible errors
> ('hear'??) in the last couple of hours.
Aha! I was about to ask if you had chosen that as your personal
mantra. Everyone else seems to have felt it not worth mentioning, but
I was keeping score!
tony cooper
>"Couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel."
This one has always bothered me. If the instructions are printed on
the heel, the boot would normally have to be emptied before they could
be read.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On 4 Oct 2010 01:01:37 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>>"Couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel."
>
>This one has always bothered me. If the instructions are printed on
>the heel, the boot would normally have to be emptied before they could
>be read.
It suggests that the person has a special sort of incompetence that
overrides normal physics. "Even if he turns the boot upside down to read
the instructions the piss still wouldn't flow out".
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Roland Hutchinson
I take it a slightly different way: the person is so gifted at failing to
accomplish the task at hand that he will find a way to fail: if he does
manage to find the instructions, he will do so by (e.g.) carefully
holding the boot over his head to read the instructions without spillage
and without being able subsequently to empty the book.
Ian Noble
wrote:
>In article <b9sga6dk512pkqle6...@4ax.com>,
> Ian Noble <ipn...@offspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:12:41 +0100, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On 02 Oct 2010, MC wrote
>> >
>> >> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
>> >> between AmE and BrE.
>> >>
>> >> Examples:
>> >>
>> >> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>> >>
>> >> the proof is in the pudding / the proof of the pudding is in the
>> >> eating
>> >
>> >If you're making a list, add titbit/tidbit...
>> >
>> >> Is there a word that describes the *process* by which they deviate?
>> >
>> >Don't know the technical term; I'd call them variations rather than
>> >deviations.
>>
>> In the case you've added, the term is "prudery".
>
>I wonder which came first.
>
>According to Merriam Webster the first known use of "tidbit" is circa
>1640.
My tongue was somewhat in my cheek, I admit. Tidbit, I suspect.
Cheers - Ian
Robin Bignall
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>In message <copespaz-91DDAD...@news.eternal-september.org>
> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>> In article <8gsp24...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>>> My favourite is Zungenwurst, which is a blood sausage with tongue in it.
>>> Very yummy.
>
>> Rather you than me! I used to get tongue in school lunches (invariably
>> called "dinners" at that time in the UK) and I loathe the taste and
>> texture...
>
>Tongue is fantastic. Extremely lean, great flavor. It used to be cheap
>because no one would buy it, but now enough people have figured it out
>that its quite pricey. If you object to the taste of it then whoever
>prepared it must have done a terrible job as it tastes like very good
>beef. If the texture is your problem... well, leaves more for me.
>
WIWAL my mother used to buy bullock's cheek, which she stewed with
root vegetables to make a nourishing and delicious dinner. Calves'
brains are a delicacy in France. Unfortunately, after the Mad Cow
scares here, animal heads seem to go to pet food factories, except for
the tongues. You don't see cheek or brains on sale at butchers but I
suppose some must be used to make brawn, which is still available.
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England
Robin Bignall
wrote:
>
I noticed. "Hear is a chance for an Oy!" I thought. But then I got
to thinking that I haven't had lapin a la moutarde for a while, and
it's time to visit the butcher this week, and got diverted.
Apteryx
> On 2 Oct, 17:07, contrex<mike.j.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2 Oct, 16:47, MC<copes...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm always interested in the small variations in expressions and sayings
>>> between AmE and BrE.
>>
>>> Examples:
>>
>>> hokey-cokey / hokey pokey
>>
>> ice cream.
>
> Is it? I've never heard that.
>
> Wikipedia describes Hokey Pokey as a popular flavour of ice cream in
> New Zealand, and a dated slang term for ice cream in Britain and New
> York.
>
And (in New Zealand) the kind of toffee that is used in hokey pokey ice
cream.
I believe in BrE that kind of toffee (which you also find inside a
Cadbury Crunchie bar) is called sponge toffee (although proper - ie
home-made - hokey pokey would have a firmer crust but maybe a softer
interior than the inside of a Crunchie bar).
Apteryx
Roland Hutchinson
So you are saying that brawn has prevailed over brains?
Robin Bignall
Pretty much. It's about time we invented the six gun.
Roland Hutchinson
I think you already did. WikiP says there's a 17th-century English
example in the Tower of London armories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixgun#History
Robert Bannister
> In message <copespaz-91DDAD...@news.eternal-september.org>
> MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>> In article <8gsp24...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>>> My favourite is Zungenwurst, which is a blood sausage with tongue in
>>> it. Very yummy.
>
>> Rather you than me! I used to get tongue in school lunches (invariably
>> called "dinners" at that time in the UK) and I loathe the taste and
>> texture...
>
> Tongue is fantastic. Extremely lean, great flavor. It used to be cheap
> because no one would buy it, but now enough people have figured it out
> that its quite pricey. If you object to the taste of it then whoever
> prepared it must have done a terrible job as it tastes like very good
> beef. If the texture is your problem... well, leaves more for me.
The problem with straight pressed tongue is that you need to have it
fresh. Kept in the fridge, it quickly acquires a "fridgy" taste. In
Zungenwurst, the spices prevent this happening, but of course it doesn't
have that delicate flavour of tongue.
Ox tongue is becoming very difficult to find over here (West Australia).
I presume not enough people were buying it. I can buy these tiny tins of
even tinier lambs tongues, which are quite nice, but somehow not the same.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
I didn't know Hawaii was famous for its kangaroo tails. Real kangaroo
tail tastes very similar to oxtail, but I'm sure you knew that.
Getting back to the chicken: it is almost impossible to describe what
meats taste like. I mean, would it be helpful to say that lamb tastes a
bit like goat without that awful lanolin taste? Or that beef is like
lamb, but different? If you must do it, that I would say that crocodile
(never had alligator) does taste vaguely like chicken with a slightly
fishy overtone. As for snake, I've only eaten dugite, and it tasted more
or less the same as eel. The problem is, how do you describe eel?
--
Rob Bannister
MC
Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> The problem is, how do you describe eel?
Like rattlesnake without the rattle?
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
Garrett Wollman
>Getting back to the chicken: it is almost impossible to describe what
>meats taste like.
"Tastes like chicken" really means "tastes like animal protein" --
after cooking, the modern broiler/fryer breast has very little left in
the way of flavor-containing compounds other than coagulated protein.
Because fat is *bad*, you know. (Well, there's a difference between
slow-twitch and fast-twitch muscle tissue, too.) Take away the
different fats and connective tissues, and all dinosaur meat probably
tastes pretty similar.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Reinhold {Rey} Aman
[...]
> As for snake, I've only eaten dugite
>
Act 1950 and to kill or injure one attracts a fine of up to AUD$4000."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dugite
--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
Immer lustig und vergnügt,
bis der Arsch im Sarge liegt.
http://aman.members.sonic.net/aman.html
Mack A. Damia
I have had oxtail soup and have thoroughly enjoyed it. Never noticed
much of a "gamey" taste, but it was very apparent in the soup. I'm
certain the tail was imported from Oz.
>Getting back to the chicken: it is almost impossible to describe what
>meats taste like. I mean, would it be helpful to say that lamb tastes a
>bit like goat without that awful lanolin taste? Or that beef is like
>lamb, but different? If you must do it, that I would say that crocodile
>(never had alligator) does taste vaguely like chicken with a slightly
>fishy overtone. As for snake, I've only eaten dugite, and it tasted more
>or less the same as eel. The problem is, how do you describe eel?
Goat is too gamey. I love lamb. Roast leg or chops, we had lamb
frequently when I was growing up. Beef, pork and lamb have distinct
flavors, I couldn't say "what" they tasted like. I agree with your
first sentence - it is almost impossible to describe what meat tastes
like. Chichen and turkey have their own flavors, too. What am I
saying? Of course they do. I love raw oysters. How do you describe
the flavor of any food? Slightly sweet or salty, fishy, gamey, etc.
Raw oysters have a flavor of the ocean; once you cook them, it
disappears. I know I've tasted eel. Doesn't it have an oily texture
with a hint of the sea? Foods taste differently as you age, I think.
I used to devour lobster, but it doesn't taste the same these days.
Same with bacon. It's more saltier than I recall it in my youth.
tony cooper
<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have had oxtail soup and have thoroughly enjoyed it. Never noticed
>much of a "gamey" taste, but it was very apparent in the soup. I'm
>certain the tail was imported from Oz.
At one time, oxtail soup was a standard variety in the Campbell's soup
line. I haven't seen it on the shelves for years, though.
Richard Bollard
<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Had cream of kangaroo tail soup in Hawaii in 1969.
>
>Tasted like dirt and I scowled a bit. The waiter apologetically
>poured a thimbleful of sherry wine into it.
>
>Then it tasted like dirt with a hint of sherry.
>
>
Maybe you got it wrong. Sound like they served you rutile soup not roo
tail.
I've had roo tail soup but never "cream of" that sounds weird. I have
read that Australians prefer the cream ofs compared with Americans (I
used to know a Campbells rep).
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia
To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
Richard Bollard
I had croc jerky recently. It tasted of spices and salt.
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>On 4 Oct 2010 01:01:37 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>>"Couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel."
>
>This one has always bothered me. If the instructions are printed on
>the heel, the boot would normally have to be emptied before they could
>be read.
Isn't that the point?
John Holmes
> Lewis filted:
>>
>> I've had rabbit a few times. I don't think it tastes anything like
>> chicken. At all.
I don't think so either.
>
> I had it regularly during the first ten years of my life (and not,
> regrettably, in the intervening forty)...maybe it's just the way it
> was prepared, but I thought they were nearly indistinguishable....
>
> Frog tasted like chicken too....
Yes.
>
>> And while I'm hear, neither does rattlesnake, alligator, or
>> crocodile.
>
> Never had crocodile, but I'm with you on the other
> two...surprisingly, ostrich tastes nothing like chicken either....r
The crocodile I've had certainly did taste like chicken. Farmed crocs
here are fed mainly on chickens.
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
Mike Barnes
>surprisingly, ostrich
>tastes nothing like chicken either
Not unlike beef, I thought. Surprising, as you say.
I've also eaten eland and wildebeest, which tasted mainly of garlic, but
I suspect that had more to do with the preparation that the animals'
diets.
And blackbirds, but that was a long time ago I don't remember the
flavour of the meat so much as the fact that the brains were the best
part of the bird. Allegedly.
--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England
Mack A. Damia
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:01:25 -0400, tony cooper <tony_co...@earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On 4 Oct 2010 01:01:37 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"Couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel."
>>
>>This one has always bothered me. If the instructions are printed on
>>the heel, the boot would normally have to be emptied before they could
>>be read.
>
>Isn't that the point?
I'd like to know who pisses in boots.
John Dunlop
> I'd like to know who pisses in boots.
I wouldn't put it past Puss in Boots.
--
John
Mack A. Damia
In that case, it's got to be, "Piss in Boots".
John Dunlop
> [John Dunlop:]
>
>> Mack A. Damia:
>>
>>> I'd like to know who pisses in boots.
>>
>> I wouldn't put it past Puss in Boots.
>
> In that case, it's got to be, "Piss in Boots".
Depends if it's a number one or two.
--
John
Mack A. Damia
Surely if you can get a cat to wear boots, you can litter train it!
MC
Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:01:25 -0400, tony cooper <tony_co...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On 4 Oct 2010 01:01:37 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> >>"Couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel."
> >
> >This one has always bothered me. If the instructions are printed on
> >the heel, the boot would normally have to be emptied before they could
> >be read.
>
> Isn't that the point?
Doesn't it depend which way up the instructions are printed?