Earlier Instance of Etymological Myth for "Posh"

[victor steinbok]

"No one" is an overstatement. The trouble with this particular connection is
that the uniformed military men in India would have been no more or less
distinguished in the early 1900s than they would have been 50-60 years
earlier. But Garson skipped the etymological note when quoting the OED
(which includes the mention of the P.O.S.H. etymythology).

Here's the note from posh n.1 (money--1830-1905):

Probably shortened < Welsh Romani påš xā̊ra halfpenny < Welsh Romani påš
> half ( < Romani paš < Sanskrit pārśva costal region, side) + Romani xā̊ra
> penny (ultimately < German Heller heller n.1); compare English Romani
> posh-hórri (representing the plural form)


 And from posh n.3 (dandy--1890-1912):

Origin unknown. Perhaps compare later posh n.4, posh adj., and perhaps also
> earlier posh n.1


Finally, for OED posh adj. and n.4 (stylish--1914-current; pretentious,
elegant style--1915-current):

It is possible that the word arose as a transferred use of posh n.1, posh
> n.3 (compare quot. 1912 at posh n.3), or both of these; the semantic
> development may thus have been either from ‘money’ to ‘moneyed, wealthy’,
> and hence to ‘upper-class’ and ‘smart, stylish, luxurious’, or alternatively
> from ‘dandy’ to ‘upper-class‘ and ‘smart, stylish, luxurious’.
>
> An alternative suggestion derives the word < Urdu safed-pōś dressed in
> white, well-dressed, also used as a colloquial and derogatory term for
> ‘affluent’ < safed white ( < Persian safed (Old Persian saped)) + pōś
> covering, also ‘clothed in, wearing’ ( < Persian pōś: see papoosh n.).
> However, this poses phonological problems and there is no direct evidence
> for the transition into English.


I've come across several versions of the latter explanation in mid- to late
19th century comments on posh==money. So, whether looking at the roots in
India or nearby colonies directly or the same through a Romani lens raised
from cant to "proper" status, the "subcontinent" connection has long been
explored, but never quite fully established. In fact, it seems that these
are the two main competing theories--was posh adj. derived directly from
Urdu/Persian/"Hindustani" or was it derived from posh n.1 and Romani, which,
in turn, had Sanskrit connections.

Note that the OED 1914 quotation does refer to the British military,
particularly cavalry, and has "posh" in quotation marks. But it would have
been odd for the word to appear this late, given the British history in
India.

VS-)

PS: When I posted two citations for "money" slang earlier, I was not
implying any antedating for the posh n.1 article. I thought the two items
might have been of general interest.



On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I am a little surprised that no one looks to the Hindustani root word
> "posh", which commonly means covered, and can also mean cherished.
>
> British military men wearing elaborate non-standard uniforms during
> service in India would have been "posh", and might have heard the word
> from their servants.
>
> DanG

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