Q: "lake and stars", Victorian euphemism?

[Laurence Horn]

At 3:26 PM -0400 6/23/09, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
>Sounds like more BS to me. The Victorians didn't need such a euphemisim
>because either they wouldn't refer to such a thing (officially it wasn't
>supposed to exist) or else, in earthy situations, they would use the real
>words.
>
>JL

Well, we could ask Steven (_The Other Victorians_) Marcus...

LH

>
>On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu>wrote:
>
>>  ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>>  -----------------------
>>  Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>  Poster:       Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
>>  Subject:      Re: Q: "lake and stars", Victorian euphemism?
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>  At 2:26 PM -0400 6/23/09, Joel S. Berson wrote:
>>  >A friend has asked me about the origins of "Lake and Stars, which
>>  >references an old Victorian euphemism for a woman's talent in
>>  >bed".  Very close to my friend's words (except for the
>>  >capitalization), but these are quoted from "Kenya's Style", on a line
>>  >of lingerie.
>>  >
>>
>>http://www.kenyasstyle.com/blogs/kenyasstyle/2009/06/todays-pick-the-lake-and-stars.html
>>  >
>>  >Google Web seems swamped with pages where the context is underwear.
>>  >
>>  Could this be Cockney rhyming slang?  If so, for what?
>>
>>  LH
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>>  The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

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