[Ads-l] "sucker punch" 1910 etc.

[Peter Reitan]

Don't know whether this complicates the origin of "sucker punch" or is merely an interesting coincidence or side-note.

The word "sucker" was used in boxing reports meaning "mouth," so to punch one's opponent in the "sucker" could mean punching him in the mouth.

I haven't seen a lot of this usage, and haven't seen "sucker punch," in so many words, in those contexts.

Here's an example:

From New York Clipper, November 7, 1863, page 239, column 2, in a report of a fight between Johnny Walker and Billy Dwyer in San Francisco on October 6, 1863.

In round 3: "Both men to the centre promptly, and after some very neat sparring Dwyer sent his bunch of fives into Walker's sucker and cutwater, turning on the tap, receiving a ribber.  They then closed, and Walker threw Dwyer, falling heavily upon him."

The "cutwater" was Walker's nose.  Presumably, the "sucker" is his mouth.  A few rounds later, the writer refers to the same organs together, but in reverse order, as "smeller and kisser."





------ Original Message ------
From: "Wilson Gray" <hwgray at gmail.com>
To: ADS-L at listserv.uga.edu
Sent: 7/29/2019 9:01:13 PM
Subject: Re: "sucker punch" 1910 etc.

---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Poster: Wilson Gray <hwgray at GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: "sucker punch" 1910 etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evidently the construction was current at the time
and in the context.

Youneverknow.

On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 9:34 PM Mark Mandel <markamandel at gmail.com> wrote:

Well, thank you, Wilson! Evidently the construction was current at the time
and in the context.

Mark

On Fri, Jul 26, 2019, 11:48 PM Wilson Gray <hwgray at gmail.com> wrote:

> > This is ungrammatical. I think the "for" wasn't supposed to be there.
>
> Not necessarily ungrammatical: cf.
>
> > At times one saw the influence of Daly in the use of the left at close
> > quarters and
> > the effective high block for which [use of the left at close quarters]
> made Fitz's right look like a
> > sucker punch.
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 8:26 PM Mark Mandel <markamandel at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > This is ungrammatical. I think the "for" wasn't supposed to be there.
> >
> > the effective high block *for which made Fitz's right look *like a
sucker
> > punch
> >
> > MAM
> >
> >
>

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



--
-Wilson
-----
All say, "How hard it is that we have to die!"---a strange complaint to
come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
-Mark Twain

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

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