Skosh

[Wilson Gray]

On Aug 22, 2004, at 12:59 AM, 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: Skosh
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>
>> I've read the several replies, and no one mentions what I remember.
>> Though I haven't heard it in many years, I do remember fairly common
>> usage in the early to mid 1950s, but I remember it as pronounced
>> skoosh
>> or skootch, with the vowel of boot.
>
> I haven't heard it that way. It is, I suppose, a further adaptation to
> English which didn't fully catch on. [Cf. Japanese "sake" > English
> "saki"
> (so pronounced and sometimes so spelled), or "sukebe" >
> "skibby"/"skivvy",
> since final /E/ is not usual. Neither is terminal /ouS/: there are
> "gauche"
> and a few esoterica.]
>
> Levi's ads showing "a skosh more room" appear in the 1980's according
> to
> on-line news search. In a couple of cases it's spelled "skoosh".
>
> Now here's something interesting. Of course "scooch [down]" meaning
> "crouch
> [down]" is old. But what about "scooch [over]" meaning "scoot [over]"?
> DARE
> shows this only from 1965 or later. Here is one of the citations:
> <<1994
> ... _Skootch over_ -- To move something a _skoash_ or more.>>.

Speaking of "a skoash or more," BE speakers use "mo' skosh" with the
meaning "a skosh more," punning on the fact that the "mo:" in Japanese
"mo: sukoshi" sounds a lot like one possible BE pronunciation of
"more." I say "one possible" because my 93-year-old, Longview,
Texas-born mother distinguishes the name "Moore" from "more" as [mo:]
vs. [mo@]. For me and, I think, for the vast majority of (Northern) BE
speakers, it's [mu@] vs. [mo], though [mo] can become [mo@] in formal
speech.

-Wilson Gray

>
> Hmmm ... what is a "skoash"? It doesn't appear in my books, it doesn't
> appear in DARE ... but we know what it must be, right?
>
> So is "sukoshi" an ancestor of "scooch [over]"? {I don't know.]
>
> -- Doug Wilson
>