Throne

[Baker, John]

        So, nonfacetious but still colloquial?

        At some point, absence of evidence becomes evidence of absence.  I only know throne=toilet in the facetious sense, but I'm seeing some fairly compelling evidence of nonfacetious uses.  I don't think I've seen any evidence of noncolloquial uses.  As Doug Wilson suggested, catalogues of appliances/fixtures aimed at plumbers or builders would be a plausible example.


John Baker


-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Benjamin Barrett
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:06 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Throne

According to a 25-year-old I spoke with yesterday, "throne" is just a normal word meaning "toilet."

The citations I provided look clear to me. I doubt anything will change my mind now. Once you have evidence that a word _can_ be used in a certain way, oodles of other uses don't negate that evidence.

Benjamin Barrett
Seattle, WA

On Dec 12, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:

> For people who see "throne" meaning toilet as not being colloquial or
> facetious, what written proof will make a difference?
>
> JL

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