jump = copulate with?

[Wilson Gray]

What we have here is a failure to communicate because of a dialect split.
For me, "he jumped her" has only the reading, "he attacked her, most likely
from behind or by some other means of ambush." From a "jump" - with
reference to rhythm - blues:

Dog jumped a rabbit
And he [the rabbit] hid behind a stump
Dog jumped a rabbit
And his [the rabbit's] heart went bumpity-bump.

"Rams *jump* sheep"? Who knew? ;-) I'm not familiar with that usage at all,
though I have seen roosters literally jump *on* hens in order to copulate
with them. It looks like we're two ships passing in the night, with repect
to non-literal uses of "jump."

-Wilson

On 11/16/05, 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: jump = copulate with?
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> But aren't "he jumped her" and "he copulated with her" equivalent,
> because "jump" can be transitive and copulate only intransitive? In
> any case, the quote I (almost) have is about rams who "jump ... sheep".
>
> Joel
>
> At 11/16/2005 05:12 PM, you wrote:
> >Oops! I nearly missed your point. I mean only that "jump" can mean
> >"copulate," but not "copulate with," because you'd have to say "jump
> with,"
> >if "copulate with" was meant.
> >
> >-Wilson
>



--
-Wilson Gray