Off and on

Wed Sep 21 15:12:25 UTC 2011

I like idioms just fine and am fascinated by semantic
inconsistencies--else why would I even be in this group? But what I do
wince at--and I seem to be alone in this--is the apparent modernization
of certain idioms that results in a kind of mixed metaphor. _Your_
examples seem happily free of that quality, but I _do_ see it in the two
that I've mentioned. (To my recollection, a light bulb used to go _on_
(producing more light or clarity) when people had an idea; now it goes
off [maybe borrowed from _a bomb_ going off?].) Anyway, the point of the
post that started all this was less to complain about an idiomatic
variant than to question its provenance. And you're right about the
futility of worrying about inevitable linguistic change.

LRH

-----Original Message-----

Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 7:12
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Off and on

---------------------- Information from the mail header
-----------------------
Poster:       Ron Butters <ronbutters at AOL.COM>
Subject:      Off and on
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------

Apparently, you get off on worying about the putatively logical
inconsistencies of language.
How can anyone who sets off on a trip ever get there? How can anyone
break wind or bad news? Why is an oversight committee not a committee to
rectify peoples' oversights?

 Or maybe you are just putting us on about expressions that put you off.

Sent from my Droid Charge on Verizon 4GLTE

------Original Message------
From:
Date: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:30:08 AM GMT-0700
Subject: Re: [ADS-L] Maddened by Mad Men

Does this mean you're also OK with people talking about light bulbs
"going _off_" in their heads (when they don't intend to say that it's
even darker in there than it was before)?

-----Original Message-----

Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 18:56
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Maddened by Mad Men

---------------------- Information from the mail header
-----------------------

Poster:       ronbutters at AOL.COM
Subject:      Re: Maddened by Mad Men
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------

This is what is called an "idiom." It does not have to make literal
sense, any more than "kick the bucket does." Or, for that matter, "Shut
up."

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 20, 2011, at 5:43 PM, "Hunter, Lynne R CIV SPAWARSYSCEN-PACIFIC,
71700"<lynne.hunter at NAVY.MIL> wrote:

> I understand what you're saying, but it seems to me (without having
> carefully thought this out) that "holding down" is generally used to
> mean something like "to retain [something]" or "keep [something] in
> place," so in the case under scrutiny, "holding down the fort" would
> seem to suggest just holding the fort in place or keeping it intact in
a
> general sort of way, whereas "holding the fort" suggests "holding
ground
> [against an adversary]," and is linked (in my mind, anyway) to
"holding
> off invaders," "holding back an onslaught," "holding out against the
> enemy," a castle "stronghold," and so forth. In other words, "hold the
> fort" (to me) implies the idea of defending against an aggressor.
> Thoughts?
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 13:57
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Maddened by Mad Men
>
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Poster:       "Shapiro, Fred" <fred.shapiro at YALE.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Maddened by Mad Men
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
>
> Isn't this just an example of the phrasal verb "to hold down,"
> documented by the OED back to 1891 and by now well established in
> phrases such as "to hold down a job"?
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 12:46 PM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Maddened by Mad Men
>
> Recent annoyance from _Mad Men_: "Miss Holloway can hold down the
fort."
> "Hold _down_ the fort" is irritating enough in the present day (at
least
> to my particular ear) without its being ascribed to 1962 speakers.
(The
> phrase conjures up a flighty outpost flimsily moored to some
low-gravity
> planet.)
>
> Lynne Hunter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

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

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

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

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