The Old English Preterite Plural Lives!
flanigan at OAK.CATS.OHIOU.EDU
Fri Dec 7 18:18:27 UTC 2001
I just remembered that my mother (b. 1906) used "snook" [snUk] all the
time, in Minnesota; "snook around" was more common for her than "snook
out." But my siblings and I only used "snuck."
At 10:40 PM 12/6/01 +0000, you wrote:
>For my first posting as a "free woman"--unfettered by constraints of working
>for RH--I'd like to add, for anyone interested in regional distribution,
>that a quick check of my age cohorts (40-ish) and unspeakably large extended
>family in the northwest reveals that they do NOT say 'snook'.
>Hope to be a more productive member of the list from now on.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jesse Sheidlower" <jester at PANIX.COM>
>To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 5:00 PM
>Subject: Re: The Old English Preterite Plural Lives!
> > > This discussion is the first I've heard of "snook" = "snuck".
> > > For me it's always been I, you, he/she/it, we, you (pl.), and they
> > > (rhymes with "duck")--except for the rare occassions when I remember
> > > "sneaked".
> > OED seems to have examples of _snook_ going back to the early 1960s,
> > and that's without even checking the electronic databases.
> > Best,
> > Jesse Sheidlower
> > OED
Beverly Olson Flanigan Department of Linguistics
Ohio University Athens, OH 45701
Ph.: (740) 593-4568 Fax: (740) 593-2967
More information about the Ads-l