Sallie.Lemons at MSDW.COM
Tue Apr 25 18:28:47 UTC 2000
My understanding is that the strand was a discussion/offering of both misquotes or
underquotes that had worked their way into the general lexicon. Examples given
were (1) proof of the pudding, (2) happy as a clam, and (3) Romeo, Romeo. In my
experience, most people commonly say Man does not live by bread alone rather than
the full quote you gave below and apply it to a variety of topics--not just diet.
A girlfriend of mine, seen ingesting a piece of chocolate cake, said "Man does not
live by bread alone." I've heard it used in sexual, financial, and other
contexts. Am I alone here?
Laurence Horn wrote:
> At 10:09 AM -0400 4/25/00, Sallie Lemons wrote:
> >What about, "Man shall not live by bread alone"?
> Sorry, I don't know what that SHOULD be instead. The New Testament quote is
> "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God"--is the idea
> that it's been re- (or mis-) interpreted as merely insisting on the
> importance of varying one's diet?
> >Laurence Horn wrote:
> >> >I've heard "the proof's in the pudding" with alarming frequency lately and
> >> >am beginning to wonder whether my version of this saying, "The proof of
> >> >the pudding's in the eating/tasting" is in fact said by a minority of one
> >> >in this world. Are there any pudding tasters (sort of like poetasters,
> >> >only different) out there who can shed a spoon on this question?
> >> >
> >> >Thanks.
> >> >
> >> >Peter Richardson
> >> I hear both, the original (transparent) and the new (opaque) versions,
> >> about half the time each. On the other hand, I almost never hear "Happy
> >> as a clam at high tide", just "Happy as a clam". And all too often "Romeo,
> >> Romeo, wherefore art thou, Romeo?"
> >> larry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ads-l