Muleociation

[Bruce Dykes]

On Thursday 16 October 2003 07:09 pm, you wrote:

> In embarrassment at my naivete I confess it was not. I can only
> observe that the original inquirer and her colleagues were also taken
> in, if that's the appropriate phrase for our common state of
> innocence.
>
> From a non-technical point of view, seems apparent to me that the student
> is
>
> >using the word "mule" as a questionably punny
> >substitute for the word "ass"
>
> Thanks to a few people who've responded here and on the Latinteach
> list I now understand. It's comparable to (e.g.) "woperson" for
> "woman," something I suspect has not seen any use other than jocular
> - although I wouldn't be *entirely* surprised to be informed
> otherwise.
>
> which still is enough to raise some folks'
>
> >hackles (believe me, some publications still get worked up about this sort
> >of thing), so I gather he or she is simply carrying the no-ass dictum to
> >extremes.
>
> I don't think it was in pursuit of a more refined style, but whether
> an attempt to catch the teacher in a state of ignorance or a
> genuinely unselfconscious word in the student's vocabulary or out of
> some other motivation I can't guess. Even now that I understand it,
> I'm puzzled by its use in a serious high school assignment and I'd
> still be interested in reports of its non-colloquial use.


There's also a more (or less, depending on your perspective) innocuous
explanation.

Internet filtration software is notorious for being uselessly literal, so it
could well be an internet filter circumlocution. It's quite easy to imagine
some software product or another substituting '[expletive deleted]ociation'
for 'association' in its default setting.

--
bkd