"O.K." in Green's Dictionary of Slang

[Jonathan Lighter]

Alan would be in the best position to comment on the latest treatment of
"OK," but since Robin Hamilton has provided me with the questionable quotes,
I'll chip in my two cents.

Both are visible here, with Jon Green's comment that they are "intriguing":

http://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-O-K-comes-from-zerO-Killed-a-phrase-used-by-pilots-during-WWII-after-a-mission-without-casualties

In the dictionary, JG's ety. note says plainly and accurately that "OK"
"dates from 1839 in the U.S." and correctly derives it from "orl korrect."
Unfortunately neither that note nor the paragraph of citations mentions the
Boston _Morning Post_, which introduced the term in 1839. The use of "OK" in
the Van Buren campaign in 1840 is accurately discussed.

So it comes as a surprise to see an 1816 ex. of African-English pidgin "O
ki!" leading off the citations of "OK" without note or disclaimer.  Cassidy
& Le Page quote a different ex. from the same source (M. G. Lewis's _Journal
of a West India Proprietor_, pub. 1834, 1845), in their entry for "Ki, Kie."
This they define, apparently correctly, as "An exclamation of amusement,
surprise, satisfaction, etc."  They mention Lorenzo Turner's report of its
existence in Gullah in the twentieth century. Wisely, they do not connect it
with "OK."

The assertion that "OK" *really* comes from "Oh! Ki!" is decades old, is
long discredited, and JG does not endorse it.  However, the outright
appearance of an "O ki!" with the early date of 1816 attached to it
will almost certainly mislead or mystify some readers, though this is
clearly not JG's intention.

The next citation, from 1823, is even less relevant:

1823 *Account of Mary M’Kinnon* 50: All you maidens who love the game, Put
on your mourning veils again. O K—, the wicked life I did spend, Has brough
[sic] me to an untimely end.

It's impossible to say, from this snippet  (from what looks to be a
British prostitute's broadside confession in verse) just what "K---" stands
for, but surely it is either a proper name elided for "privacy" (a common
literary device of the period) or else justa typo for   "G---," meaning
"God!"  In any case, the printed "O K--" cannot be translated coherently as
"OK" in any sense.

It's really a shame that these two very misleading exx. appear without
brackets or any other suggestion that they're not what a layperson might
assume them to be.

Other than this snippet, I haven't been able to examine Jon's new dictionary
in any detail.

(The link above, BTW, reveals a new and especially bizarre folk etymology of
"OK" that assumes it is no older than World War II; when I was in high
school, we assumed that to be true of most of the "four-letter words.")

JL
 On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: "O.K." in Green's Dictionary of Slang
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Just what are these citations, Fred?
> JL
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Shapiro, Fred <fred.shapiro at yale.edu>
> wrote:
>
>  > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > -----------------------
> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster:       "Shapiro, Fred" <fred.shapiro at YALE.EDU>
> > Subject:      "O.K." in Green's Dictionary of Slang
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I have had my first look at Green's Dictionary of Slang, and it appears
> to
> > be excellent.  Green seems to have monitored the ADS-L list serv, and to
> > have picked up most of the antedatings posted here.  I haven't yet
> > ascertained the extent to which he used online searching to find first
> uses.
> >
> > I am very interested to see that, under _O.K._, he has two citations
> > earlier than the standard 1839 first use discovered by Allen Walker Read.
> >  One is a usage of _O ki!_ dated 1816, and one is a usage of "O K---"
> from
> > 1823.  I am curious what our slang authorities such as Jon Lighter and
> Jesse
> > Sheidlower think of these.  Are they new discoveries?  Should they be
> > accepted as the earliest uses of _O.K._ without even square brackets, as
> > Green seems to accept them?  If they are accepted, do they affect the
> > etymology?  (Green agrees with Read that "orl korrect" is the
> derivation.)
> >
> > Fred Shapiro
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>



-- 
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

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