Puritan euphemisms

Baker, John JBAKER at STRADLEY.COM
Tue Oct 23 16:52:19 UTC 2012


        But you're forgetting the Third Commandment:  Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.  There is no religious proscription on saying "pissehouse."


John Baker



-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Joel S. Berson
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:28 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Puritan euphemisms

Jon, I don't recall any such.  But I haven't read much from diaries,
little after the 1740s or so, and mostly written by the "upper
sorts".  I have read a bit in court records, but I don't recall any
such there either.  And being me, I would likely have noticed and
passed any on to Jesse/you/the list.

I'm suspicious too.  Did the Puritans mince words?  They strike me as
quite blunt and earthy, even in court records (remember
"pissehouse"?).  And perhaps more likely to have used dashes than euphemisms?

Joel

At 10/23/2012 10:38 AM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
>Joel, do any of your 18th  C. Puritan buddies use minced oaths like "Jiminy
>Crickets!" and "Doggone it!"
>
>Such oaths aren't much in evidence till well into the 19th C., but the same
>historian friend had "read somewhere" that they were created as euphemisms
>by the Puritans.  (He's a political, not a linguistic, historian.)
>
>Sounds plausible (always a danger signal)  but the gap in attestation is
>more than considerable. Also, the Puritan population may have been too
>small and too localized to sustain much of a repertoire.
>
>JL
>
>On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
>
> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > -----------------------
> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster:       "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
> > Subject:      Re: ague
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > At 10/23/2012 12:29 AM, Wilson Gray wrote:
> >
> > >On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Jonathan Lighter
> > ><wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > "og"
> > >
> > >I went with [ejg] for dekkids. However, I've yet to have occasion to
> > >speak this word. I have the vague sense that [ejgju] is the way to go.
> > >Don' know, f' sho. I also thought that this disease had been cured
> > >back in the Elizabethan era.
> >
> > Since I live in the 18th century, I've had much occasion to read
> > it.  (Conversation is rarer.)
> >
> > There was much confusion, or conflation, of disease and symptoms, so
> > into and past the 18th century "ague" might refer to either.  (Even
> > the OED lumps both together, under sense 1.)  When "ague" was used to
> > refer to a disease it might be one of several having the ague symptom
> > of "acute or high fever ... esp. when recurring periodically" and
> > accompanied by "an intense feeling of cold and shivering" (OED).
> >
> > I suspect now "ague" is most associated with malaria.  But there is
> > still imprecision:
> > 2002   J. Thompson Wide Blue Yonder iv. 273   You weren't supposed to
> > go to India during the monsoons... People caught agues and fevers and
> > funguses.
> >
> > (Altho' I doubt not a Practitioner of Physick would not speak thusly.)
> >
> > Joel
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
>
>
>
>--
>"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

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

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



More information about the Ads-l mailing list