shit! (coarse exclamation of annoyance or disgust)

[George Thompson]

I forwarded my original message on this to Jonathon Green, who has dropped off this list.  He replied with a question as to whether the word was used as an exclamation, rather than addressed to the umpire during a dissent from a decision.  My reply to him is I think more clearly expressed than my reply to similar questions here.

"I'm not hopeful that there will be an absolute answer.
I would say that I think the most likely is that the player uttered a coarse exclamation of annoyance over a play that displeased him.  It was unlikely that the word was used in controverting an umpire's decision -- the umpire was probably another member of his club, and in any event, it would have been considered unsporting to argue a decision.  (This changed a couple of decades later when the sport was professionalized, but the Knickerbockers thought of themselves as gentlemen amateurs.)  So I think it's unlikely that the word was used to the umpire as an intensifier, in saying something like "shit, that ball was fair" and extremely unlikely that the term was used as an expression of contempt for the umpire (You shit! That ball was fair!)."

GAT

George A. Thompson
Author of A Documentary History of "The African Theatre", Northwestern Univ. Pr., 1998, but nothing much lately.

----- Original Message -----
From: George Thompson <george.thompson at nyu.edu>
Date: Sunday, September 5, 2010 12:02 pm
Subject: Re: shit! (coarse exclamation of annoyance or disgust)
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

> G O'T:
> Is it possible that the fined player was using the term as a noun?
>
> shit, shite, n. 1. b. A contemptuous epithet applied to a person.
>
> The first cite in the OED is 1508 for this sense. For example 1886 W.
> Somerset Word-bk., Shit, a term of contempt. (Very com.) He's a
> regular shit. Applied to men only.
>
> Perhaps Ebenezer R. Dupignac called umpire Eugene Plunkett a "shit"
> for making a bad call?
>
> JL:
> Garson's suggestion is very reasonable.  Possibly more reasonable,
> because it would have been a direct challenge to the umpire.

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