"guy'' NOT ''guys''

[Jonathan Lighter]

Nobody in his or her right mind would use singular vocative "guy" to a female.

  On the other hand, there must have been a time when that was said about the plural vocative "guy" as well.  And I used to think the same thing about singular vocative "buddy."

  "Language is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine." --JL, after A.C. Clark

  JL

RonButters at AOL.COM wrote:
  ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
Sender: American Dialect Society
Poster: RonButters at AOL.COM
Subject: "guy'' NOT ''guys''
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Joel S. Berson" wrote:

In a message dated 6/15/07 11:02:05 AM, wuxxmupp2000 at YAHOO.COM writes:


> Is it linguistically noteworthy that it is also being used today to
> refer to females, including by females? What date should one look to beat
>

Joel is talking about the PLURAL usage, and = 'y'all' or 'yuz', which has
been endless discussed here.

.I'm referring to the singular "guy" = 'buddy' 'fella' 'sir' 'mister' etc.,
as in "I'm telling you, guy, I just don't feel like going to the ball game."
Used only to a male.


**************************************
See what's free at
http://www.aol.com.

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org



---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org