"gay" again

[Arnold M. Zwicky]

On Jul 29, 2006, at 2:59 PM, Ben Zimmer wrote:

> Not sure if this has been noted here before, but one recent semantic
> development on the "gay" front is the construction "be gay for" =
> 'have an unseemly or exuberant affection for (someone or
> something)'...

i don't recall having seen this one -- i might just not have noticed
it -- but i have noticed "be queer for" in this sense.  an
interesting sense development: the component of attraction remains,
while the sexual component vanishes.

arnold

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org