Re: "oral sex" among th e Victorians + postil(l)ion

[Thomas Paikeday]

----- Original Message -----
From: <RonButters at AOL.COM>
To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 10:47 AM
Subject: Re:       Re: "oral sex" among the Victorians + postil(l)ion


> ---------------------- Information from the mail
> header -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       RonButters at AOL.COM
> Subject:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:=20=A0=20=A0=20=A0=20Re:=20"oral=20sex"=20amon?
>              = =?ISO-8859-1?Q?g=20the=20Victorians=20+=20postil(l)ion?=
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In a message dated 1/11/06 10:04:46 AM, laurence.horn at YALE.EDU writes:
>
>
>> The nice thing about "venery"
>> is that it could also refer to terms specific to hunting; both
>> veneries come into Middle English from the same ultimate Latin source
>> along with "win", "venom", "venison", etc.
>>

"... the same ultimate Latin source"? My resources are not so good as
Larry's, but I would think the ultimate source is IE wen- "to desire", one
"venery" being from L venari "to hunt" and the other from L Venus, -eris
"love". Sorry to take you so far away from oral sex.

Tom
www.paikeday.net

>
> This allowed Sir Thomas Wyatt in the 16th century to pun extensively in
> his
> sonnet that begins;
>
> Whoso list to hunt, I know where is a hind,
> But as for me I can no more.
> The vain travail has wearied me so sore,
> I am of them that furthest come behind.
>
> Supposedly, the poem was written about his squashed love affair with the
> queen.