Is "sucking up" offensive? Vulgar?
nancy g.
Just looking for opinions here:
We were stuck waiting in a lobby the other day at a Baptist
conference/retreat center. The only reading material available
was fundamentalist Christian literature (sigh). Now, without
getting into *any* religious discussion, PLEASE, I'd just like
to ask about something I read.
I don't remember the name of the magazine, but it was aimed at
the teenage fundamentalist Christian population. It featured lots
of clean, wholesome kids taking part in clean, wholesome activities
and talking about how blessed they feel.
It was the "Letters to the Editor" column that intrigued me, though.
One furious parent had written in and was cancelling her daughter's
subscription, effective immediately. She was shocked and outraged
that a publication calling itself "Christian" had used such a vulgar
and offensive term as "sucking up." (The context was something like
a student saying that he didn't think it was "sucking up" to a teacher
to always do your best work and turn it in on time to get good grades.)
Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
polite company, and I still won't allow my kids to say it around me
(although I suspect I'm in the minority on this one, unfortunately).
But I'd never associated the term "sucking up" with that expression.
I wouldn't say "This sucks" to either my mother or my kids, but I'd
use "sucking up" around either of them and not think twice about it.
So, opinions, please? Is the term "sucking up" even *related* to the
word in the "this sucks" sense? Is there anyone out there who doesn't
agree with me that "this sucks" might be considered vulgar or offensive
but "sucking up" in no way is either? I mean, I *know* the woman was
overreacting; my question is just to what degree.
Thanks. And although dictionary cites might be useful, my main question
here is about people's *reaction* to the phrase, and how they *feel* it is
meant, rather than what it is literally defined as.
Nancy G.
wondering what that woman's daughter thinks about the whole thing ...
and how she talks when Mom's not listening to her.
Warren
> Is the term "sucking up" even *related* to the
> word in the "this sucks" sense? Is there anyone out there who doesn't
> agree with me that "this sucks" might be considered vulgar or offensive
> but "sucking up" in no way is either?
Nancy, I agree with you. I do not consider the term "sucking up" as
either vulgar or offensive. However, it certainly is an insult to
describe someone as "sucking up to...".
ESLTEACHER
nancy g. (nan...@tiac.net) wrote:
: Just looking for opinions here:
: She was shocked and outraged
: that a publication calling itself "Christian" had used such a vulgar
: and offensive term as "sucking up." (The context was something like
: a student saying that he didn't think it was "sucking up" to a teacher
: to always do your best work and turn it in on time to get good grades.)
: Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
: polite company, and I still won't allow my kids to say it around me
: (although I suspect I'm in the minority on this one, unfortunately).
Nope this is still disgusting language in most parts, although a whole
lot of people are using disgusting language of late.
: But I'd never associated the term "sucking up" with that expression.
: I wouldn't say "This sucks" to either my mother or my kids, but I'd
: use "sucking up" around either of them and not think twice about it.
I don't know where you're from, but I know that where I'm from the term
you mention is still considered to be on the rude side. I'm not up to
using it yet, not even with my Mom 500 miles away. I don't think I'd use
it around anyone's children.
This term was a rude one when I was growing up, and as far as I know,
it is still a rude term. I am happy to leave it that way. Otherwise,
what will be next? Maybe in 10 years people will be asking whether
or not people are off-base to get upset over the use of f* in family-
oriented material. (it already seems that way in New York City)
There are other ways to express the activitiy which *are* socially
acceptable.
Meg
--
ESL Teacher
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." Gandhi
***********************************************************************
The ESL/EFL/ESOL Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) file is available at:
WWW: http://math.unr.edu/linguistics/mele.faq.html
Usenet: misc.education.language.english
***********************************************************************
Dave Wilton
nancy g. wrote:
> Thanks. And although dictionary cites might be useful, my main question
> here is about people's *reaction* to the phrase, and how they *feel* it is
> meant, rather than what it is literally defined as.
According the OED2, the sense of 'suck-up' is derived from the sense of
'suck'
meaning sustenance. A 'suck' (noun) can be a parasite or toady. To
'suck-up'
is to act the sycophant. This slang sense of the word predates the
earliest
OED cite of 'suck' for fellatio by several decades.
Personally, I find the term vulgar, but not offensive. But then, I find
very
little offensive, so I am probably not a good judge.
--Dave Wilton
dwi...@sprynet.com
Jon Robert Crofoot
tea...@dorsai.org (ESLTEACHER) wrote:
>nancy g. (nan...@tiac.net) wrote:
>: Just looking for opinions here:
>
>: I wouldn't say "This sucks" to either my mother or my kids, but I'd
>: use "sucking up" around either of them and not think twice about it.
>
>I don't know where you're from, but I know that where I'm from the term
>you mention is still considered to be on the rude side. I'm not up to
>using it yet, not even with my Mom 500 miles away. I don't think I'd use
>it around anyone's children.
>This term was a rude one when I was growing up, and as far as I know,
>There are other ways to express the activitiy which *are* socially
>acceptable.
>
>Meg
>
I think I agree that "sucking up..." is pretty rude, but
not quite so rude as "brown-nosing..."
John Innes
> Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
> polite company, and I still won't allow my kids to say it around me
> (although I suspect I'm in the minority on this one, unfortunately).
> But I'd never associated the term "sucking up" with that expression.
> I wouldn't say "This sucks" to either my mother or my kids, but I'd
> use "sucking up" around either of them and not think twice about it.
>
I don't know where it came from, but I wouldn't have said the "sucking up
to" was at all rude.
It's a common phrase in the UK, whereas "this sucks" has never really
taken hold - although has grown with Beavis & Butthead being shown over
here.
J
--------------------------------------------------------------
The statements made in this e-mail are not necessarily the opinion of John Brown Publishing, and should not be attributed to the company.
John Innes
Electronic Publisher, John Brown Publishing
Viz Comic http://www.viz.co.uk/
Fortean Times http://www.forteantimes.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------
alan auerbach F
"Sucking up" is slang with a touch of vulgarity. Is it offensive?
No, if the connotation is a nursing mammal.
Yes insofar as "suck" evokes fellatio.
"It sucks" is so commonly used as to be almost innocuous,
although I confess I don't know exactly what it means and
where it comes from.
--
Al.
Steve Gibbons
In article <544l7m$6...@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Jon Robert Crofoot <Bob.C...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> writes:
|> tea...@dorsai.org (ESLTEACHER) wrote:
|> >nancy g. (nan...@tiac.net) wrote:
|> >: Just looking for opinions here:
|> >
|>
|> >: I wouldn't say "This sucks" to either my mother or my kids, but I'd
|> >: use "sucking up" around either of them and not think twice about it.
|> >
|> >I don't know where you're from, but I know that where I'm from the term
|> >you mention is still considered to be on the rude side. I'm not up to
|> >using it yet, not even with my Mom 500 miles away. I don't think I'd use
|> >it around anyone's children.
|> >This term was a rude one when I was growing up, and as far as I know,
|>
|> >There are other ways to express the activitiy which *are* socially
|> >acceptable.
|> >
|> >Meg
|> >
|> I think I agree that "sucking up..." is pretty rude, but
|> not quite so rude as "brown-nosing..."
A person mught see "sucking up" as a reference to oral sex, which would probably
make it worse than "brown-nosing". Neither would be used in polite correspondence.
Lee Rudolph
sgib...@nortel.ca (Steve Gibbons) writes (in overlong lines which I've
reformatted):
>A person mught see "sucking up" as
>a reference to oral sex, which would probably
>make it worse than "brown-nosing".
How so? Is "brown-nosing" not a very slightly euphemized
"ass-kissing"? Is it not likely that someone who saw
``"sucking up" as a reference to oral sex'' would see
"brown-nosing" as the same (chacun \`a son gout, and all
that)?
Lee Rudolph
nancy g.
Lee Rudolph wrote:
> Is "brown-nosing" not a very slightly euphemized
> "ass-kissing"? Is it not likely that someone who saw
> ``"sucking up" as a reference to oral sex'' would see
> "brown-nosing" as the same (chacun \`a son gout, and all
> that)?
Hmmmmm.
Dare I ask how the related phrase "kissing up to" would
fit into this whole thread?
Nancy G.
just had to ...
Mike Barnes
The dancing digits of "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> created this
pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
>Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
>polite company
Do you mean that there is/was a general negative reaction to that word
in some societies? In our family "a vacuum cleaner sucks up the dirt"
would be unremarkable.
Regards, Mike.
--
Mike Barnes, Stockport, England.
This week's hot tips for the lottery: 12, 14, 23, 32, 38, 34.
Truly Donovan
nancy g. wrote:
>
> Dare I ask how the related phrase "kissing up to" would
> fit into this whole thread?
My West Highland White Terrier, all 20 pounds of her, absolutely adores
BIG dogs. When she encounters a Great Pyrenees, for instance, she goes
into paroxysms of joy and stands on her hind legs so that she can reach
up to kiss them. A literal rendering of "kissing up to," I think.
--
Truly Donovan
"Industrial-strength SGML," Prentice Hall 1996
ISBN 0-13-216243-1
http://www.prenhall.com
Paul Bogrow
Truly Donovan <tr...@lunemere.com> wrote:
>stands on her hind legs so that she can reach up to kiss them.
On the head end? Are you sure you have a dog there?
Dave Moorman
> The dancing digits of "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> created this
> pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
> >Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
> >polite company
>
> Do you mean that there is/was a general negative reaction to that word
> in some societies? In our family "a vacuum cleaner sucks up the dirt"
> would be unremarkable.
Here in the States, the fairly vulgar expression, "This sucks", is used to
describe something you loathe, detest, or otherwise dislike. When used
this way in saying, "This vacuum cleaner sucks", the speaker would be
expressing his or her disgust with the vacuum cleaner.
If a physics teacher said to his class, "This vacuum cleaner sucks", he
would (probably) be describing the physics of the machine and how it
collected things into itself. In this context there would be no objection
to the use of the word "suck".
Elementary school teachers here (whose students range in age from 5 to 12
years) often have ribald senses of humor, but do they do not approve of
"This sucks" at all. It's a big no-no in schools.
Dave
--
Dave Moorman Metasignatures can be fun!
Downers Grove
Illinois, USA
http://homepage.interaccess.com/~dmoorman/DavesPage.html
nancy g.
Actually, Paul, ummmmm ...
did she ever mention *which* end her dog was at?
Nancy G.
I wouldn't know; I've got two cats.
Truly Donovan
Paul Bogrow wrote:
>
> Truly Donovan <tr...@lunemere.com> wrote:
> >stands on her hind legs so that she can reach up to kiss them.
>
> On the head end? Are you sure you have a dog there?
Small dogs get *that* treatment. BIG dogs get kissed on the face. It's
probably the ultimate canine gesture of submission but it sure looks
like infatuation.
Mike Barnes
The dancing digits of Dave Moorman <dmoo...@interaccess.com> created
this pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
>In article <Qr3HaEAJ...@exodus.co.uk>, news-r...@exodus.co.uk wrote:
>
>> The dancing digits of "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> created this
>> pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
>> >Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
>> >polite company
>>
>> Do you mean that there is/was a general negative reaction to that word
>> in some societies? In our family "a vacuum cleaner sucks up the dirt"
>> would be unremarkable.
>
>Here in the States, the fairly vulgar expression, "This sucks", is used to
>describe something you loathe, detest, or otherwise dislike. When used
>this way in saying, "This vacuum cleaner sucks", the speaker would be
>expressing his or her disgust with the vacuum cleaner.
>
>If a physics teacher said to his class, "This vacuum cleaner sucks", he
>would (probably) be describing the physics of the machine and how it
>collected things into itself. In this context there would be no objection
>to the use of the word "suck".
>
>Elementary school teachers here (whose students range in age from 5 to 12
>years) often have ribald senses of humor, but do they do not approve of
>"This sucks" at all. It's a big no-no in schools.
Yes, but the words "up the dirt" indicate that the literal and physical
meaning of "sucks" is intended. I still don't know whether the US
reaction to the word "sucks" extends to such cases. Would you feel it
necessary to rephrase the sentence "a vacuum cleanrer sucks up the dirt"
before uttering it in a family setting?
nancy g.
Mike Barnes wrote:
> Yes, but the words "up the dirt" indicate that the literal and physical
> meaning of "sucks" is intended. I still don't know whether the US
> reaction to the word "sucks" extends to such cases. Would you feel it
> necessary to rephrase the sentence "a vacuum cleaner sucks up the dirt"
> before uttering it in a family setting?
No, we would not. I was the one who made this original statement:
> >> >Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
> >> >polite company
which I fully admit was badly phrased. The word "suck" as in the vacuum
cleaner example is *not* a problem in a family setting. I was referring
only to the epithet "this sucks" and should have said so. Once again I've
fallen into the trap of assuming that because *I* know what I'm talking about,
anyone reading my posts will know too. I should know better. Sorry.
Actually, I *do* know better. I should just *remember* better.
On the other hand ... there *was* a time here in the States where,
apparently, people would go to great lengths to avoid the use of words
which had any kind of a double meaning that could be considered too
familiar or vulgar. I've heard stories (most likely apocryphal) about
people having "chest of chicken" or "bosom of chicken" for dinner instead
of using the word "breast," for example, or saying "limbs" because "legs"
was too personal a word to say in mixed company.
Anybody out there know more of these formerly "offensive" words, and which
ones actually *were* considered impolite? I suspect it dates back to the
same era in which married women were expected to refer to their husband
as "Mr. Surname" in public, and address him by his given name only when they
were alone. (For that matter, is this too just a story, or did it really
happen? I wonder when the first brave woman addressed her husband by his
given name in public?)
Nancy G.
> This week's hot tips for the lottery: 12, 14, 23, 32, 38, 34.
Great. Now I'm fighting the compulsion to go out and buy a ticket ...
and losing the fight. Sigh. Guess I'll pick one up when I go out later.
I'll let you know what happens. (grin) (Do I have to share my winnings?)
Making a mental note to myself:
DO NOT READ MIKE'S SIG WHEN READING ONE OF HIS POSTS.
STOP READING BEFORE YOU GET TO THE LOTTERY NUMBER PART.
Barbara Nelson
Perhaps the vulgar connotation of "suck" goes back to suckle and breast feeding
when that was never done in public or spoken of. Our Puritan ancestors?
Yes, in the 40s I was acquainted with an older German woman who always referred
to her husband as "Mr. Surname". She may have been less formal with friends.
bn
Baty
She was shocked and outraged
>that a publication calling itself "Christian" had used such a vulgar
>and offensive term as "sucking up."
snipped
>Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
>polite company, and I still won't allow my kids to say it around me
>(although I suspect I'm in the minority on this one, unfortunately).
>But I'd never associated the term "sucking up" with that expression.
>I wouldn't say "This sucks" to either my mother or my kids, but I'd
>use "sucking up" around either of them and not think twice about it.
>
>So, opinions, please? Is the term "sucking up" even *related* to the
>word in the "this sucks" sense? Is there anyone out there who doesn't
>agree with me that "this sucks" might be considered vulgar or offensive
>but "sucking up" in no way is either? I mean, I *know* the woman was
>overreacting; my question is just to what degree.
I have given up on trying to stamp out "it sucks" even though I
distinctly remember that when I was in high school everyone assumed it
was related to that other term that I don't think I'm supposed to say on
a newsgroup but it starts with a c and ends with sucks. We weren't
etymologists, just kids, and maybe the word has a long history totally
apart from that other word, but the way we snickered whenever anyone said
"that sucks" or "he sucks" was proof enough that we believed the word to
be related to that *other* word and to be totally obscene. As far as
"sucking up" is concerned, it means the same thing to me as
"brown-nosing" and "kissing ass" and I consider all of them offensive
(especially should they be used in reference to me or mine) and don't
particularly like to hear them.
Linda
Dave Moorman
> Yes, but the words "up the dirt" indicate that the literal and physical
> meaning of "sucks" is intended. I still don't know whether the US
> reaction to the word "sucks" extends to such cases. Would you feel it
> necessary to rephrase the sentence "a vacuum cleanrer sucks up the dirt"
> before uttering it in a family setting?
Depends on the context (and the family). If you just said "a vacuum
cleaner sucks", the context would determine if you were saying that it was
despicable or it sucked up dirt. Families have different values about
this. Some would feel that saying "This sucks" would be terribly vulgar,
others not. It would take a pretty loony famly to object to someone
saying, "The vacuum cleaner sucks (dirt)". Sort of like the woman who
would say "precipeepee" instead of "precipice" - propriety carried to (or
past) the point of absurdity.
Daniel P. B. Smith
>> before uttering it in a family setting?
The cluster of associated connotations of a specific word is subject to
fairly rapid changes in fashion. Just like catch-phrases, you can have
catch-associations taking hold, being in vogue for years, and dying away.
They are propagated by whatever social mechanism spreads jokes, fads,
fashions; including but not limited to late-night talk shows and sitcoms.
Thus, my answer to the above question is: 1900 to 1970, I wouldn't rephrase
it because the sexual aura of the word "suck" was not mainstream enough for
it to bother anybody. 1970 to 1990, I might, because the association between
the word "suck" and the sexual meaning was strong enough to make the word
worth avoiding. 1990 to the present, the use of the word in the phrase
"this sucks," etc. has become so common that, in effect, it has now become
desexualized again.
An example of how associations come and go: maybe ten or twenty years ago,
a convention emerged in which the name "Bruce" was associated with
homosexuality. That is, if a television comedian wanted to make a joke
victimizing gays the effeminate, lisping, limp-wristed character would
often be named "Bruce." Needless to say this caused a certain amount of
anguish for people named Bruce whose parents had not had the foresight to
anticipate language fashions. Fortunately, I _believe_ this association
is now forgotten.
>On the other hand ... there *was* a time here in the States where,
>apparently, people would go to great lengths to avoid the use of words
>which had any kind of a double meaning that could be considered too
>familiar or vulgar. I've heard stories (most likely apocryphal) about
>people having "chest of chicken" or "bosom of chicken" for dinner instead
>of using the word "breast," for example, or saying "limbs" because "legs"
>was too personal a word to say in mixed company.
When serving cooked chicken, my parents would say "Do you want the leg or
the second joint?" "Breast" was OK, "leg" was OK, but "thigh" was not.
Incidentally, I think there was a time when "breast" was sort of OK because
it was _less_ sexualized than it is now.
I don't think the right picture "there was a time when we used euphemisms
and now we don't." I think the right picture is that there is a never-ending
cycle of which things are thought to require euphemisms. "Toilet," for
example, began as a euphemism for "water closet."
--
Daniel P. B. Smith
dpbs...@world.std.com
Ken West
>
>
> I have given up on trying to stamp out "it sucks" even though I
> distinctly remember that when I was in high school everyone assumed it
> was related to that other term that I don't think I'm supposed to say on
> a newsgroup but it starts with a c and ends with sucks. We weren't
> etymologists, just kids, and maybe the word has a long history totally
> apart from that other word, but the way we snickered whenever anyone said
> "that sucks" or "he sucks" was proof enough that we believed the word to
> be related to that *other* word and to be totally obscene.
How about the theory that it refers to "sucking mud", as in a pump whose
source is exhaused, and therefore a very disappointing situation?
> As far as "sucking up" is concerned, it means the same thing to me as
> "brown-nosing" and "kissing ass" and I consider all of them offensive
> (especially should they be used in reference to me or mine) and don't
> particularly like to hear them.
Can't argue with this one.
regards,
Ken West
JSA
If "suck up" means the same as "kiss ass", then it is not only vulgar
but even Satanic (allegedly). Interesting, that a so-called Christian
publication used the term.
"Ass kissing" refers to the "kiss of shame", a practice that required
the kissing of a goat's (sometimes even the devil's) anus <yuck!>.
Inquisitors insisted that this practice was part of initiation rituals
into witchcraft. Please keep in mind, that those accused of "sucking
up" had to be tortured to confess to it.
By the way, "sucking up" is not part of any initiation -- not into
witchcraft, not into anything.
Gary Williams, Business Services Accounting
In article <54c45c$j...@nadine.teleport.com>, Baty <ba...@teleport.com> writes:
> "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> wrote:
> the way we snickered whenever anyone said "that sucks" or "he sucks" was
> proof enough that we believed the word to be related to that *other* word
> and to be totally obscene.
Do junior high/high school kids _still_ snicker whenever anyone says "that
sucks"? And, if not, does this mean that the word has lost its obscene
connection, or simply that what today's young people consider obscene has
changed?
Gary Williams
WILL...@AHECAS.AHEC.EDU
Rob Pegoraro
>Yes, but the words "up the dirt" indicate that the literal and physical
>meaning of "sucks" is intended. I still don't know whether the US
>reaction to the word "sucks" extends to such cases. Would you feel it
>necessary to rephrase the sentence "a vacuum cleanrer sucks up the dirt"
>before uttering it in a family setting?
That dirt reference reminds me of the lede one of our writers used in her
review of the movie "Twister" this summer. I still have no idea how this
gem made it past the copy desk:
"Not only does 'Twister' suck, it blows."
I don't doubt that we got a few letters about that one...
ro...@cais.com ====================================================
Rob Pegoraro At work, I'm r...@twp.com, but
Washington, D.C., USA I'm only speaking for myself here
======================================== http://www.cais.com/robp/
Mike Barnes
The dancing digits of "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> created this
pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
>
>> Yes, but the words "up the dirt" indicate that the literal and physical
>> meaning of "sucks" is intended. I still don't know whether the US
>> reaction to the word "sucks" extends to such cases. Would you feel it
>> before uttering it in a family setting?
>
Thanks for clearing that up.
>On the other hand ... there *was* a time here in the States where,
>apparently, people would go to great lengths to avoid the use of words
>which had any kind of a double meaning that could be considered too
>familiar or vulgar. I've heard stories (most likely apocryphal) about
>people having "chest of chicken" or "bosom of chicken" for dinner instead
>of using the word "breast," for example, or saying "limbs" because "legs"
>was too personal a word to say in mixed company.
>
>Anybody out there know more of these formerly "offensive" words, and which
>ones actually *were* considered impolite?
It is said that in Victorian England the word "trousers" was considered
vulgar. These garments were referred to as "unmentionables" or
"inexpressibles". I find this highly amusing but I doubt that the term
was in general use - does anyone *know*?
>
>> This week's hot tips for the lottery: 12, 14, 23, 32, 38, 34.
>
>Great. Now I'm fighting the compulsion to go out and buy a ticket ...
>and losing the fight. Sigh. Guess I'll pick one up when I go out later.
FYI:
1. The numbers are always the same.
2. On a UK lottery ticket the numbers make the shape of a smile.
3. I have never bought a ticket, and never intend to.
>I'll let you know what happens. (grin) (Do I have to share my winnings?)
Not unless I have contributed to the stake, and I wouldn't do that, so I
guess the answer is "no". There are many ways in which my life could be
ruined tomorrow, and I have no wish to add "winning a ridiculously large
sum of money" to the list.
Regards, Mike.
--
Mike Barnes, Stockport, England.
Markus Laker
dpbs...@world.std.com (Daniel P. B. Smith):
> An example of how associations come and go: maybe ten or twenty years ago,
> a convention emerged in which the name "Bruce" was associated with
> homosexuality. That is, if a television comedian wanted to make a joke
> victimizing gays the effeminate, lisping, limp-wristed character would
> often be named "Bruce." Needless to say this caused a certain amount of
> anguish for people named Bruce whose parents had not had the foresight to
> anticipate language fashions. Fortunately, I _believe_ this association
> is now forgotten.
I had no idea of this. Life has been passing me by. Does this
association predate the Monty Python sketch about the Australian club
whose members all liked to be called Bruce and most of whose club rules
were 'no poofters' -- or vice versa?
[Mailed to DPBS; crossposted to alt.fan.monty-python; a.b.g-o removed
from followups]
Markus Laker.
--
In order to thwart programs that harvest email addresses from newsfeeds,
my address is deliberately wrong. Delete the final X.
Gary Williams, Business Services Accounting
> If "suck up" means the same as "kiss ass", then it is not only vulgar
> but even Satanic (allegedly). Interesting, that a so-called Christian
> publication used the term.
I've deleted the post, so can't give proper credit, but I offer the following
as evidence in support of the poster who suggested that "to suck up" may have
acquired its sexual connotation fairly recently.
In _Cassell's Colloquial Spanish_, first published in 1953, revised in 1972 and
in 1980, the expression "hacer la barba (a alguien)" is explained as meaning
"to suck up (to someone)". Now, this book is quite frank in its use of English
equivalents where a term is vulgar or offensive in Spanish; it freely offers
"to fuck", "shit", and "to piss" as the best translations of certain words.
However, the discussion in these cases always includes a warning to the effect
that the term is vulgar or offensive or not in polite use, followed by the
English equivalent. There is no such warning preceding the translation "to
suck up".
Gary Williams
WILL...@AHECAS.AHEC.EDU
nancy g.
Although I'm answering this comment, please note that, contrary to the
attributions above, I was not the one who made the original comment about
"snickering." As near as I can tell by tracing back the references, it
was Baty who said it.
But to answer the question -- no, they don't. My 13-year-old (middle
school, eighth grade) uses the word as a normal part of his vocabulary,
unfortunately. He does know he's not permitted to say it around me, but
whenever I remind him of that fact I get one of those sadly sympathetic
looks that lets me know (just in case there was any doubt) that I already
have one foot in the grave and the other foot apparently out in the tar
pits with the dinosaur fossils ...
I haven't got any idea what today's young people consider obscene.
As near as I can tell, nothing. They *do* have some phrases which they
consider vulgar, however, and I'm constantly getting tripped up by them
in conversations with my son. The latest is "woody," which caused him
to go into spasms of snickering as I attempted to explain its origins in
the surfing culture of the 60's (when a "woody" was a type of car used to
transport surfers and surfboards to the beach -- just listen to any
Beach Boys album for proof of this).
Apparently in the 90's, "woody" is slang for an erection. Sigh.
Nancy G.
Did anyone else know that?
Am I really *that* much of an old fogy?
Mary Murphy and Leo Wong
Daniel P. B. Smith <dpbs...@world.std.com> wrote:
> ... my answer to the above question is: 1900 to 1970, I wouldn't
> rephrase it because the sexual aura of the word "suck" was not
> mainstream enough for it to bother anybody. 1970 to 1990, I might,
> because the association between the word "suck" and the sexual meaning
> was strong enough to make the word worth avoiding. 1990 to the > present, the use of the word in the phrase "this sucks," etc. has
> become so common that, in effect, it has now become desexualized > again.
I wouldn't avoid a word because some people attach a sexual meaning to
it. Many common words (e.g., "lick") are in that state. Most people
who say "suck up to" want to sound vulgar when they say it--please grant
them that.
Gay as I wanna be....
Earle D. Jones
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>
> >
[.....]
>
> > >> >Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
> > >> >polite company
[......]
Just as nouns drift into verbdom and adjectives become nouns, so does it
happen that dirty words drift into common acceptability. During my life
time, many words that I would not have used in front of anyone (other than
my buddies) have become acceptable.
I once heard my teen-aged daughter say of the quarterback (following a
particularly inept pass play), "Boy, he has really shot his wad!"
When I was a teenager "Shot his wad" meant that he ejaculated--no more and
no less. Now it seems to mean exhausted or unable to continue.
Today you hear the word, "pissed", meaning irate or (UK) drunk. I even
hear "pissed" and "pissed off" on radio shows.
The word "butt" (rear end of the human anatomy) is used very frequently in
everyday talk. Even "ass" is coming into acceptability.
"Screw" will be completely acceptable in a few more years (in the sense of
"Oh, screw that, I'm not going to do it!"
"He's an asshole!" will be in common usage within a few years.
The James Bond movie that introduced Pussy Galore broke a barrier in my
opinion. Now we hear "pussy" referring to a supposedly tough guy who
really has a heart of gold. In my youth the expression "Pussy galore" was
definitely obscene and referred to a situation where there were a lot of
girls available.
"That was a crappy movie" is OK today. "That was a shitty movie" is not
(quite) acceptable.
"Up you!" or "Up yours!" is not so bad today. "Up your ass!" is still
objectionable. "Up the Organization"--a different usage.
"This movie sucks!" is very common among young people today. And believe
me, it doesn't refer to the breast.
"Stanford sucks but Berkely swallows!"--graffitti seen in Palo Alto.
For a while, "Bitchin'" meant very good. I think it's out of use now.
Enough of this shit.
earle
=====
__
__/\_\
/\_\/_/
\/_/\_\ earle
\/_/ jones
Dave Moorman
In article <robp-ya02318000...@news2.cais.com>, ro...@cais.com
(Rob Pegoraro) wrote:
> "Not only does 'Twister' suck, it blows."
>
> I don't doubt that we got a few letters about that one...
From what I've heard about the movie, it's true. And it is a cool lead!
Daan Sandee
In article <326C3E...@tiac.net> "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> writes:
[snip]
>I haven't got any idea what today's young people consider obscene.
>As near as I can tell, nothing. They *do* have some phrases which they
>consider vulgar, however, and I'm constantly getting tripped up by them
>in conversations with my son. The latest is "woody," which caused him
>to go into spasms of snickering as I attempted to explain its origins in
>the surfing culture of the 60's (when a "woody" was a type of car used to
>transport surfers and surfboards to the beach -- just listen to any
>Beach Boys album for proof of this).
>
>Apparently in the 90's, "woody" is slang for an erection. Sigh.
>
>Nancy G.
>Did anyone else know that?
>Am I really *that* much of an old fogy?
Well, I knew that. It had been brought to my attention not long ago,
quite possibly on this newsgroup (dejanews, anyone?). My knowledge
of teenage slang, other than from The Catcher in the Rye, and so on,
is negligible. But there is Woody Allen and I used to have a colleague
called Woody, so it may be fairly recent.
Daan Sandee
Burlington, MA Use this email address: san...@think.com
--
Daan Sandee
Burlington, MA Use this email address: san...@think.com
Daan Sandee
[snip]
>I haven't got any idea what today's young people consider obscene.
>As near as I can tell, nothing. They *do* have some phrases which they
>consider vulgar, however, and I'm constantly getting tripped up by them
>in conversations with my son. The latest is "woody," which caused him
>to go into spasms of snickering as I attempted to explain its origins in
>the surfing culture of the 60's (when a "woody" was a type of car used to
>transport surfers and surfboards to the beach -- just listen to any
>Beach Boys album for proof of this).
>
>Apparently in the 90's, "woody" is slang for an erection. Sigh.
>
>Nancy G.
>Did anyone else know that?
>Am I really *that* much of an old fogy?
Well, I knew that. It had been brought to my attention not long ago,
quite possibly on this newsgroup (dejanews, anyone?). My knowledge
of teenage slang, other than from The Catcher in the Rye, and so on,
is negligible. But there is Woody Allen and I used to have a colleague
called Woody, so it may be fairly recent.
--
Lee Rudolph
san...@think.com.nospam (Daan Sandee) writes:
>In article <326C3E...@tiac.net> "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> writes:
...
>>Apparently in the 90's, "woody" is slang for an erection. Sigh.
>>
>>Nancy G.
>>Did anyone else know that?
>>Am I really *that* much of an old fogy?
>
>Well, I knew that. It had been brought to my attention not long ago,
>quite possibly on this newsgroup (dejanews, anyone?). My knowledge
>of teenage slang, other than from The Catcher in the Rye, and so on,
>is negligible. But there is Woody Allen and I used to have a colleague
>called Woody, so it may be fairly recent.
I know of a woman in the Radcliffe Class of 1954 whose nickname at
the time, used apparently by her parents and eveyone else without
a blush, was "Pussy". So I don't think your colleague and Mr. Allen
provide a waterproof argument (though I agree, not for that reason,
that it's recent).
Lee Rudolph
Jonathan Mason
Yes, fashions change in word usage. "That sucks" was (and is) always an
American expression and had little currency in British English.
Interesting how euphemisms for sexually charged terms while ostensibly
distracting attention from their sexual connotations, actually have the
opposite effect. Those Victorians who covered their piano legs so as to
avoid unecessary sexual stimulation must have led tortured lives.
May own name is an interesting case in point (regarding fashions). When I
was younger, Jonathan was a wildly unpopular name and I was known as
John.Now John is right out of fashion due, I suppose to the American
usage of John as a euphemism for latrine, and there are Jonathans
springing out of the closet left, right, and center (centre U.K.).
Dave Wilton
Earle D. Jones wrote:
>
> Just as nouns drift into verbdom and adjectives become nouns, so does it
> happen that dirty words drift into common acceptability. During my life
> time, many words that I would not have used in front of anyone (other than
> my buddies) have become acceptable.
>
> I once heard my teen-aged daughter say of the quarterback (following a
> particularly inept pass play), "Boy, he has really shot his wad!"
>
> When I was a teenager "Shot his wad" meant that he ejaculated--no more and
> no less. Now it seems to mean exhausted or unable to continue.
Its not as simple as just dirty words drifting into acceptability.
"Shoot one's wad" was originally a gunnery term and came to mean
to 'do all one could do.' The finality of the term, coupled with
the visual imagery I suppose, led the way for the phrase to become
associated with ejaculation.
The aforementioned daughter's usage is either a drift back to
acceptability or an older sense of the term. Terms acquire and
discard meanings as time passes. Formerly respectable words can
become disreputable and vice versa.
--Dave Wilton
dwi...@sprynet.com
Dave Moorman
In article <54igrj$6...@bone.think.com>, san...@think.com.nospam (Daan
Sandee) wrote:
> Well, I knew that. It had been brought to my attention not long ago,
> quite possibly on this newsgroup (dejanews, anyone?). My knowledge
> of teenage slang, other than from The Catcher in the Rye, and so on,
> is negligible. But there is Woody Allen and I used to have a colleague
> called Woody, so it may be fairly recent.
There is also Woody Woodpecker. :-)
Bill Bonde
Earle D. Jones <ejo...@hooked.net> wrote in article
<ejones-2210...@206.80.6.11>...
> In article <326946...@tiac.net>, "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> wrote:
>
> > Mike Barnes wrote:
> >
> > >
> [.....]
> >
> > > >> >Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
> > > >> >polite company
>
> [......]
>
> Just as nouns drift into verbdom and adjectives become nouns, so does it
> happen that dirty words drift into common acceptability. During my life
> time, many words that I would not have used in front of anyone (other
than
> my buddies) have become acceptable.
>
> I once heard my teen-aged daughter say of the quarterback (following a
> particularly inept pass play), "Boy, he has really shot his wad!"
>
> When I was a teenager "Shot his wad" meant that he ejaculated--no more
and
> no less. Now it seems to mean exhausted or unable to continue.
How about as in shot a firearm?
> Today you hear the word, "pissed", meaning irate or (UK) drunk. I even
> hear "pissed" and "pissed off" on radio shows.
>
> The word "butt" (rear end of the human anatomy) is used very frequently
in
> everyday talk. Even "ass" is coming into acceptability.
Thanks to David Letterman.
> "Screw" will be completely acceptable in a few more years (in the sense
of
> "Oh, screw that, I'm not going to do it!"
>
> "He's an asshole!" will be in common usage within a few years.
I'm waiting for 'Buddy this!' to become acceptable.
> The James Bond movie that introduced Pussy Galore broke a barrier in my
> opinion. Now we hear "pussy" referring to a supposedly tough guy who
> really has a heart of gold. In my youth the expression "Pussy galore"
was
> definitely obscene and referred to a situation where there were a lot of
> girls available.
>
> "That was a crappy movie" is OK today. "That was a shitty movie" is not
> (quite) acceptable.
Once you get there, what exactly is left not to say?
>
> "Up you!" or "Up yours!" is not so bad today. "Up your ass!" is still
> objectionable. "Up the Organization"--a different usage.
>
> "This movie sucks!" is very common among young people today. And believe
> me, it doesn't refer to the breast.
There are a lot of bad movies now'days.
> "Stanford sucks but Berkely swallows!"--graffitti seen in Palo Alto.
"Women suck, but I like that"
>
> For a while, "Bitchin'" meant very good. I think it's out of use now.
But 'Cool' never seems to go away.
Shakib Otaqui
On 22 Oct, in article <54igmq$6...@news3.alpha.net>
j...@sunline.net "Jonathan Mason" wrote:
JM> May own name is an interesting case in point (regarding fashions). When I
JM> was younger, Jonathan was a wildly unpopular name and I was known as
JM> John.Now John is right out of fashion due, I suppose to the American
JM> usage of John as a euphemism for latrine, and there are Jonathans
JM> springing out of the closet left, right, and center (centre U.K.).
"John" remained the most popular first name in Britain for several
centuries. But it has dropped to 40th place in the six years since
John Major became prime minister. Fashion can be cruel.
--
You're not a star until they can spell your name in Karachi.
_____________________________________________________________________
Shakib Otaqui Al-Quds Consult
Earle D. Jones
In article <01bbc095$a48d3bc0$05eb...@billb.halcyon.com>, "Bill Bonde"
<bi...@halcyon.com> wrote:
> Earle D. Jones <ejo...@hooked.net> wrote in article
> <ejones-2210...@206.80.6.11>...
> > In article <326946...@tiac.net>, "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Mike Barnes wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > [.....]
> > >
> > > > >> >Now, I do know that the word "suck" until recently wasn't used in
> > > > >> >polite company
> >
> > [......]
> >
> > Just as nouns drift into verbdom and adjectives become nouns, so does it
> > happen that dirty words drift into common acceptability.
=======Clipalot Here========
>
> >
> > For a while, "Bitchin'" meant very good. I think it's out of use now.
> But 'Cool' never seems to go away.
===========
Don't bet on *never*:
Bitchin' Hep Hip Cool (Kewl) Next(?)
1940/50's 1950's 1970's 1980's and 90's
Your guess is as good as mine.
Earle D. Jones
In article <326D46...@sprynet.com>, dwi...@sprynet.com wrote:
> Earle D. Jones wrote:
> >
> > Just as nouns drift into verbdom and adjectives become nouns, so does it
> > happen that dirty words drift into common acceptability. During my life
> > time, many words that I would not have used in front of anyone (other than
> > my buddies) have become acceptable.
> >
> > I once heard my teen-aged daughter say of the quarterback (following a
> > particularly inept pass play), "Boy, he has really shot his wad!"
> >
> > When I was a teenager "Shot his wad" meant that he ejaculated--no more and
> > no less. Now it seems to mean exhausted or unable to continue.
>
> Its not as simple as just dirty words drifting into acceptability.
> "Shoot one's wad" was originally a gunnery term and came to mean
> to 'do all one could do.' The finality of the term, coupled with
> the visual imagery I suppose, led the way for the phrase to become
> associated with ejaculation.
>
> The aforementioned daughter's usage is either a drift back to
> acceptability or an older sense of the term. Terms acquire and
> discard meanings as time passes. Formerly respectable words can
> become disreputable and vice versa.
>
> --Dave Wilton
> dwi...@sprynet.com
=========
Dave:
You enlighten me greatly!
I did not know of any earlier usage of "...shot his wad..." but I do
remember the use of the word *wad* to refer to the packing around the
gunpowder in a gun or missile system.
(A quick look at Webster's 3rd Unabridged says, "A soft plug of a material
used to pack the powder in a muzzle-loading weapon...")
Now--how do I explain all of this to my daughter?
Mike Barnes
The dancing digits of "Earle D. Jones" <ejo...@hooked.net> created this
pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
>Bitchin' Hep Hip Cool (Kewl) Next(?)
>
>1940/50's 1950's 1970's 1980's and 90's
|
Fab
1960s
-- Mike Barnes, Stockport, England.
-- If you post a response to Usenet, please *don't* send me a copy by e-mail.
nancy g.
Mike Barnes wrote:
>
> The dancing digits of "Earle D. Jones" <ejo...@hooked.net> created this
> pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
> >Bitchin' Hep Hip Cool (Kewl) Next(?)
> >
> >1940/50's 1950's 1970's 1980's and 90's
> ^ ^
> | |
>
> Fab Sweet!
>
> 1960s 1995 +
I believe "sweet!" will make it into this list, so I've taken the
liberty of adding it, above. My son (13, 8th grade) and his friends
have been saying it for almost a year now, and today I noticed it
has made it into the comic pages (well, the sports pages, anyway)
with an appearance in the sports-related comic "In the Bleachers."
In fact, the character actually says "Whoa. Sweet!" and I'd think
*both* of those words might make permanent status.
Nancy G.
and by the way, it's pronounced "Suh-WEET!" with a strong emphasis on
the "t" sound at the end.
Richard M. Alderson III
In article <ejones-2310...@206.80.6.11> ejo...@hooked.net
(Earle D. Jones) writes:
>Bitchin' Hep Hip Cool (Kewl) Next(?)
>1940/50's 1950's 1970's 1980's and 90's
Bitchin': 1960's surfer/hotrodder talk, 1980's ValSpeak
Hep: 1940's, not 1950's
Hip: 1950's to 1970's (beatniks, then hippies)
Cool: 1930's jazz musicians, 1940's musicians, 1950's beats (and teenagers),
1960's teens & tweens, 1970's+ everyone.
1960's: fab, gear, neat(o), keen, neat-o-keen, ...
--
Rich Alderson You know the sort of thing that you can find in any dictionary
of a strange language, and which so excites the amateur philo-
logists, itching to derive one tongue from another that they
know better: a word that is nearly the same in form and meaning
as the corresponding word in English, or Latin, or Hebrew, or
what not.
--J. R. R. Tolkien,
alde...@netcom.com _The Notion Club Papers_
Bob Cunningham
"nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> said:
[...]
>I believe "sweet!" will make it into this list, so I've taken the
>liberty of adding it, above.
Sometime around 1960 a word our kids and their friends used a lot
was "boss". I decided it was about equivalent to the older word
"neato".
Keith C. Ivey
lrud...@panix.com (Lee Rudolph) wrote:
>san...@think.com.nospam (Daan Sandee) writes:
>>"nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> writes:
>...
>>>Apparently in the 90's, "woody" is slang for an erection.
>>
>I know of a woman in the Radcliffe Class of 1954 whose nickname at
>the time, used apparently by her parents and eveyone else without
>a blush, was "Pussy". So I don't think your colleague and Mr. Allen
>provide a waterproof argument (though I agree, not for that reason,
>that it's recent).
I agree that the argument is weak. Men continue to use the
names "Dick", "Peter", and "John". I don't believe that their
slang meanings are particularly new.
Keith C. Ivey <kci...@cpcug.org> Washington, DC
Contributing Editor/Webmaster
The Editorial Eye <http://www.eeicom.com/eye/>
Mike Davis
In article <32710612....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, exw...@ix.netcom.com
(Bob Cunningham) wrote:
I keep hearing 'boss' more frequently. Along with 'smart'. Must ask my,
er, POSSLQ (a teacher) what the current, dare I say it, 'faves' are...
Mike.
--
Mike Davis
mda...@futurenet.co.uk
http://www.futurenet.co.uk/
Mike Barnes
The dancing digits of Mike Davis <mda...@futurenet.co.uk> created this
pronouncement in alt.usage.english...
>In article <32710612....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, exw...@ix.netcom.com
>(Bob Cunningham) wrote:
>
>> "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> said:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >I believe "sweet!" will make it into this list, so I've taken the
>> >liberty of adding it, above.
>>
>> Sometime around 1960 a word our kids and their friends used a lot
>> was "boss". I decided it was about equivalent to the older word
>> "neato".
>
>I keep hearing 'boss' more frequently. Along with 'smart'. Must ask my,
>er, POSSLQ (a teacher) what the current, dare I say it, 'faves' are...
Around here "the boss" is also used tongue-in-cheek to mean "my wife"
(or FSLQ).
Bob Cunningham
Jonathan Mason <j...@sunline.net> said:
>I believe the use of the word "boss" for the wife has some connection
>with the (fictitious) Diaries of Dennis Thatcher in the satirical British
>magazine Private Eye, in which Margaret Thatcher (the super-assertive
>former prime minister of the UK) was referred to (humorously) as "the
>boss".
>
I remember hearing men refer to their wives as "the boss" at least
fifty years ago. With respect to British usage there may be the
connection JM suggests, but I suspect that the American usage is much
older than Dennis Thatcher.
Speaking of "boss", though, I mentioned in a recent a.u.e. posting
that I had heard my kids in the 1960s using "boss" as an adjective in
the sense of "excellent" or "first-rate". I see now in the _Dictionary
of American Regional English_ (DARE) that "boss" was used in that sense
as far back as 1836. There are also citations from 1880, 1885, and
1916. The 1885 citation is from Mark Twain's _Huckleberry Finn_.
The DARE has a cluster of citations between 1965 and 1970. This
suggests that the usage may have been revived or reinvented sometime in
the 1960s.
N.R. Mitchum
Jonathan Mason wrote:
-----------
> with the (fictitious) Diaries of Dennis Thatcher in the satirical British
> magazine Private Eye, in which Margaret Thatcher (the super-assertive
> former prime minister of the UK) was referred to (humorously) as "the
> boss".
For decades men have referred to their and other men's wives as
"the Boss." Most often these are men who consider themselves to
be fully in charge but are ready to make hollow deference to "the little
woman." This is true at least for America, and, supposing that the
British have not thwarted human nature entirely, it might well be true
for their country too.
Now, me, I really am the boss: I decide whether the US should boycott
Chinese manufactures while my wife handles the small stuff.
Nathan Mitchum [Post&Mail]
Jonathan Mason
Mark Odegard
[posted and e-mailed] In article <32766aca...@news.tcp.co.uk>, la...@tcp.co.ukx (Markus Laker) wrote:
>dpbs...@world.std.com (Daniel P. B. Smith):
>
>> An example of how associations come and go: maybe ten or twenty years ago,
>> a convention emerged in which the name "Bruce" was associated with
>> homosexuality. That is, if a television comedian wanted to make a joke
>> victimizing gays the effeminate, lisping, limp-wristed character would
>> often be named "Bruce." Needless to say this caused a certain amount of
>> anguish for people named Bruce whose parents had not had the foresight to
>> anticipate language fashions. Fortunately, I _believe_ this association
>> is now forgotten.
>
>I had no idea of this. Life has been passing me by. Does this
>association predate the Monty Python sketch about the Australian club
>whose members all liked to be called Bruce and most of whose club rules
>were 'no poofters' -- or vice versa?
Bruce indeed *was* a sort of sissy name. But Bruce Willis did
change that. Bruce Lee helped too. What did *NOT* help was Bruce
Wayne a.k.a. Batman and his boy-toy Robin (as sexually ambiguous
a name as they come); let's face it: Adam West was not Val
Kilmer. With Val Kilmer, we have a name loaded with
homosexual potential, but Val Kilmer (sounds like Joyce Kilmer
and Valentines) ain't no Adam West.
--
Mark Odegard ode...@ptel.net
[e-mailed copies of responses to my postings are welcomed]
The great orthographical contest has long subsisted between
etymology and pronunciation. It has been demanded, on one hand,
that men should write as they speak; but, as it has been shown
that this conformity never was attained in any language, and
that it is not more easy to persuade men to agree exactly in
speaking than in writing, it may be asked, with equal propriety,
why men do not rather speak as they write.
-- Samuel Johnson, "The Plan of an English Dictionary" (1747).
Bob Bridges
> > "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> said:
> > >I believe "sweet!" will make it into this list...
> In article <32710612....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
exw...@ix.netcom.com
> (Bob Cunningham) wrote:
> > Sometime around 1960 a word our kids and their friends used a
lot
> > was "boss". I decided it was about equivalent to the older word
> > "neato".
Mike Davis <mda...@futurenet.co.uk> wrote in article
<mdavis-0111...@172.18.22.102>...
> I keep hearing 'boss' more frequently. Along with 'smart'. Must ask
my,
> er, POSSLQ (a teacher) what the current, dare I say it, 'faves'
are...
1) I first heard "boss" in the late '60s ("look at that boss moon!") -
from a cousin I saw but rarely - and had to ask what it meant. I took
it at the time to be a Californiism. I doubt I've heard it more than
half a dozen times since.
2) What's POSSLQ? Sometimes I can work out these abbreviations by
context but this one doesn't sound like anything to me.
3) While I was reading this I used "bummer!" to one of my sons and
realized that has to go on this list, too. Whom do I submit it to?
I've lost the address.
G Sumner Hayes
"Bob Bridges" <RHB...@ibm.net> writes:
> 2) What's POSSLQ? Sometimes I can work out these abbreviations by
> context but this one doesn't sound like anything to me.
>
thread around here recently, otherwise I doubt it would have been used
without clarification...
obOnTopic: The word "gnarly" was used in the early-mid eighties as a
synonym for "cool" and "rad".
Cordially,
Sumner
Please don't CC: postings to me, my mailbox is already full enough.
Mike Davis
In article <01bbca0a$b9c50080$6afc48a6@default>, "Bob Bridges"
<RHB...@ibm.net> wrote:
> > > "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net> said:
> > > >I believe "sweet!" will make it into this list...
>
> > In article <32710612....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
> exw...@ix.netcom.com
> > (Bob Cunningham) wrote:
> > > Sometime around 1960 a word our kids and their friends used a
> lot
> > > was "boss". I decided it was about equivalent to the older word
> > > "neato".
>
> Mike Davis <mda...@futurenet.co.uk> wrote in article
> <mdavis-0111...@172.18.22.102>...
> > I keep hearing 'boss' more frequently. Along with 'smart'. Must ask
> my,
> > er, POSSLQ (a teacher) what the current, dare I say it, 'faves'
> are...
>
>
> 2) What's POSSLQ? Sometimes I can work out these abbreviations by
> context but this one doesn't sound like anything to me.
Sorry - Person of Opposite Sex Sharing Living Quarters. Came up in another
thread recently. That'll be me assuming that everyone reads the same
threads as I do, then ;-).
Mike.
--
Mike Davis | If you post a reply to Usenet, I'd
mda...@futurenet.co.uk | be grateful if you _didn't_ send
http://www.futurenet.co.uk/ | me a copy by email. Thanks!
Colin Fine
In article <55jm76$r8_...@news.polaristel.net>, Mark Odegard
<ode...@ptel.net> writes
>Bruce indeed *was* a sort of sissy name. But Bruce Willis did
>change that. Bruce Lee helped too. What did *NOT* help was Bruce
>Wayne a.k.a. Batman and his boy-toy Robin (as sexually ambiguous
>a name as they come);
Not over here. I think I've come across Robin as a female name, but it's
normally male.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Colin Fine 66 High Ash, Shipley, W Yorks. BD18 1NE, UK |
| Tel: 01274 592696/0976 436109 e-mail: co...@kindness.demon.co.uk |
| "We're all in a box and the instructions for getting out |
| are on the outside" -K.B.Brown |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard M. Alderson III
In article <55frrq$c...@krypto.zippo.com> Jonathan Mason <j...@sunline.net>
writes:
I suspect that many of us were referring to our wives as "the boss" long before
the butcher's daughter became the PM. *Long* before...