Not in HDAS?

[Wilson Gray]

On Aug 21, 2004, at 11:16 PM, Douglas G. Wilson wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       "Douglas G. Wilson" <douglas at NB.NET>
> Subject:      Re: Not in HDAS?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>
>> The BE meaning, "vagina, female genitalia," seems to be missing from
>> the HDAS definitions of "cock."
>
> It's there, sense 3. The earliest citation has "cock" in unisex sense,
> like
> "sex organ [of either sex]".

Thanks, Doug. I see it, now. It seems to have a different history from
that of "cock" with the meaning, "penis." I was paging through a book
of gay-themed [I'm not gay, myself. Not that there's anything wrong
that.] erotic paintings and engravings, when I came across an engraving
from some time after the use of the tap as a conduit for liquids (1050,
per OED II. The engraving was of a group of naked men standing in the
water near the taps of a public bath. The figures of the men were posed
in such a way that the taps could be taken to be, at first glance, the
foot-long or more semi-erect penises of the men. Given that "cock" also
means or used to mean "tap" (OED II dates this meaning to 1481; cf.
petcock, stopcock), the visual pun was obvious.

And when I think of "tap" as in "tap a keg of beer," the BE slang
phrase, "tap that (ass)" suddenly begins to make sense.

> There is also the sense "sex" (3b).
>
> When I was young I'd hear sometimes "get some cock" meaning the same as
> "get some pussy/poontang", i.e., "get some sex".

Oddly enough, I know "poontang" only as a literary term. I don't think
that I've ever heard it actually spoken.

>  Here it's not clear
> whether the basic or original sense was anatomical or related to the
> activity.

FWIW, I consider the anatomical version to be the original, for no
reason that would stand up in court.

>
> I also used to hear "cock story" meaning "dirty/sexy story" ... i.e., a
> story about sex (not a story about a sex organ).

That term is new to me.

>
> I suspect that the progression was "cock" = "penis", then
> "sex"/"f*ck[ing]", then "sex organ", then "female sex organ".

That seems quite reasonable, IMO.

>
> I showed a while back an early instance of "poontang" = "sex" (I
> think),
> apparently not "female sex organ"; I suppose this term also went from
> "sex"
> to "female sex organ". Partridge mentions Canadian slang "poontanger" =
> "penis", I suppose from "poontang" = "f*ck".

Speaking of "f*ck," do you recall that, as recently as the '70's, it
was ungrammatical to say, e.g. "Mary f*cked John," using "f*ck" in its
literal meaning? In fact, in the book, Studies Out In Left Field,
published in 1971, this very phrase was used as an example of an
ungrammatical sentence. Also, do you recall the days when only men
"laid" (women; there was a college drinking song with the words, "I
laid her once. I laid her twice. I laid her once too often") and only
women "got laid" (by men)? Nowadays, AFAIK, "get laid" is unisex and
"lay" = "f*ck" is totally obsolete.

-Wilson Gray

>
> Of course it's hard to be sure since the early printed record may be a
> bit
> sparse!
>
> -- Doug Wilson
>