from the mail bag

[victor steinbok]

Yes, "innocent"--I meant no "obscene" implication.

VS-)

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu>wrote:

>
> On Sep 12, 2011, at 2:06 AM, Wilson Gray wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:11 PM, victor steinbok <aardvark66 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> double entendre: We are building insurance around you.(R)
> >
> > Uh, I don't get it, even under the assumption that "double-entendre"
> > is exaggeration for effect.
> >
>
> If "double-entendre" is just French for 'pun' (after all, puns do literally
> involve two meanings) rather than the narrowed sense it usually has, i.e.
> 'pun with one obscene meaning that often involves a double-take on the
> hearer/reader's part', it qualifies:
>
> We are [building insurance] around you  ("building" as what we're now
> calling a nounadjective, compound stress)
> We [are building] insurance around you  ("building" as a verb, no compound)
>
> Interesting that "double entendre" has become hard to understand as an
> intentional but "innocent" play on words.
>
> LH
>
> > --
> > -Wilson
>

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