"poker" lore

[Victor Steinbok]

That is certainly one interpretation, but, given the context (that, I
suppose, I did not cite specifically--so I'll try to rectify this), I
suspect another. Specifically, as one uses the poker as intended, it
tends to get hot as a side effect of this use. It is not a deliberate or
desired effect--it is a byproduct that you get through natural use. So
when one is accused of saying that he wants to be paid for heating the
poker, the implication is that he is trying to take credit for something
that he is not actually responsible for. I'll get the citations for
specific instances in a bit...

     VS-)

On 1/2/2011 8:36 PM, Dave Hause wrote:
> This strikes me as possibly relating to paying specially for the preparation
> of something which has a defined price which should include the
> preparation - a mulled drink classically heated with a poker from the fire.
> Dave Hause, dwhause at jobe.net
> Waynesville, MO
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Victor Steinbok"<aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM>
>
>
> Three unrelated "poker" pieces from around 1830-1833. No, they have
> nothing to do with the game of poker AFAIK
>
> 1. I spotted several appearances of the phrase "[won't] pay for heating
> the poker", including in the piece I cited in an earlier message on
> "sponge". I am assuming the idea is similar to "X and a dime will buy
> you Y".
>

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