Who's diddling and how?

[Joel S. Berson]

It certainly seems as though an important factor is what additional
information there is in the text (including assumptions about gender
from names), in the context of the utterance, and in the hearer's
experience (cultural. sexual, etc.).  An increasingly interesting lab
experiment must be on the way.

Joel

At 7/16/2008 10:18 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
>At 1:51 AM +0000 7/17/08, ronbutters at aol.com wrote:
>>One way of describing this is that transitive FUCK is marked for
>>-MASC & +FEM subject. So without further info, "Chris loved fucking
>>Lynn" will be assumed to indicate a male subject, at least for older
>>speakers. However, "Marcia loves fucking Fred" sounds perfectly
>>unambiguous to me.
>>Of course, "further information" may also include folks knowledge
>>of--and imagination of events in--the real world.
>>
>>Still, if both fuckers are of the same sex, then the subject seems
>>to me to be the inserter and the object the insertee: "Tom loves
>>fucking Fred" puts Tom on the inside unless there is other info to
>>the contrary. In other words, the insertion aspect of fucking seems
>>more fundamental than who is on top. But maybe that has more to do
>>with my world view than my knowledge of English.
>
>And as noted, it's not just if they're of the same sex, but if
>equipment differences can be neutralized in one way or another.  So
>"Chris loves fucking Dana with a {dildo/strap-on}" turns Chris into
>the inserter and Dana the insertee regardless of their sex or
>position.
>
>LH
>
>>------Original Message------
>>From: Laurence Horn
>>Sender: ADS-L
>>To: ADS-L
>>ReplyTo: ADS-L
>>Sent: Jul 16, 2008 1:51 PM
>>Subject: Re: [ADS-L] Who's diddling and how?
>>
>>At 1:35 PM -0400 7/16/08, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>>>At 7/16/2008 01:24 PM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>To return to the original query.
>>>>
>>>>Try this X-rated thought experiment on your wise-ass students (18
>>>>and over only, please!).
>>>
>>>An insufficient poll, due to one limitation in its wording.
>>>
>>>Imagine you're walking along an isolated forest path. You turn a
>>>corner and discover, to your surprise, a naked couple "doing it" in
>>>some semblance of a female on top position.
>>
>>And especially if she is (with the assistance of technology) doing
>>the penetrating...  (In fact, that situation might render the first
>>part of the exclamation even more likely.)
>>
>>Granted, Jon and others will correctly observe that these are
>>atypical contexts, at least until the culture evolves...
>>
>>LH
>>
>>>Now imagine that "X" in
>>>the following sentences stands for the "f-word."  Which of the
>>>following exclamations is most likely to be produced by your brain?
>>>(No other exclamation allowed for the present purpose.):
>>>
>>>A. "Omigod! They're Xing!"
>>>B. "Omigod! He's Xing her!"
>>>C. "Omigod! She's Xing him!"
>>>
>>>I wonder if C would move up past B, or perhaps -- depending on how
>>>religiously fundamentalist the thinker is -- even past A.
>>>
>>>Joel
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Imagine you're walking along an isolated forest path. You turn a
>>>>corner and discover, to your surprise, a naked couple "doing it" in
>>>>the some semblance of either the missionary or canine-related
>>>>position.  Now imagine that "X" in the following sentences stands
>>>>for the "f-word."  Which of the following exclamations is most
>>>>likely to be produced by your brain? (No other exclamation allowed
>>>>for the present purpose.):
>>>>
>>>>A. "Omigod! They're Xing!"
>>>>B. "Omigod! He's Xing her!"
>>>>C. "Omigod! She's Xing him!"
>>>>
>>>>I strongly suspect that this is the order in which the utterances
>>>>will in most cases occur to them. I further predict that, when time
>>>>machines become inexpensive and practicable, you will find that most
>>>>speakers you test going back to the 16th C. (and earlier if you
>>>>replace the "f-word" with a period synonym like "swive") will yield
>>>>comparable results.
>>>>
>>>>Choice C seems to me unlikely in this situation, but hardly
>>>>"ungrammatical" or even grammatically (as opposed to
>>>>psychologically) peculiar.
>>>>
>>>>My belief based on HDAS exx., etc.: Such verbs most typically take
>>>>masculine subjects (for what I believe are obvious physiological
>>>>reasons), but in appropriate contexts feminine subjects are also idomatic.
>>>>
>>>>JL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>  >The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>>
>>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

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