I understood it's older than 'coney', having a really ancient Indo-European root. Like 'queen', to which it's related. If I remember, a a 'cunt' is a sacred well in Sanskrit, but it's also got lots of things to do femininity.
In the Mahabharata, Kunti was the mother of the Pandavas, the good guys, one of whom was Arjuna, the co-star of the Bhagavad Gita. I think the Celtic version of Kali was also known as Cunti.
I love this stuff too. I just can't ever remember it.
That probably explains why a friend of a friend changed her name to Kunti Ratna when she became a Hare Krishna. Well, it goes some way to explaining it. Of course, nothing could ever fully explain changing your name to Kunti.
So is there any significance in "quaint" and "queen" sharing three letters? Seems to me we need info on the derivation of "quaint".
That probably explains why a friend of a friend changed her name to Kunti Ratna when she became a Hare Krishna. Well, it goes some way to explaining it. Of course, nothing could ever fully explain changing your name to Kunti.
So is there any significance in "quaint" and "queen" sharing three letters? Seems to me we need info on the derivation of "quaint".
I'm pretty sure all the "qu" words are Anglo-Saxon. The "gw" words are Welsh.
c.1225, "cunning, proud, ingenious," from O.Fr. cointe "pretty, clever, knowing," from L. cognitus "known," pp. of cognoscere "get or come to know well" (see cognizance). Sense of "old-fashioned but charming" is first attested 1795, and could describe the word itself, which had become rare after c.1700 (though it soon recovered popularity in this secondary sense). Chaucer used quaint and queynte as spellings of cunt in "Canterbury Tales" (1386), and Andrew Marvell may be punning on it similarly in "To His Coy Mistress" (1650).
cunt:
"female intercrural foramen," or, as some 18c. writers refer to it, "the monosyllable," M.E. cunte "female genitalia," akin to O.N. kunta, from P.Gmc. *kunton, of uncertain origin. Some suggest a link with L. cuneus "wedge," others to PIE base *geu- "hollow place," still others to PIE *gwen-, root of queen and Gk. gyne "woman." The form is similar to L. cunnus "female pudenda," which is likewise of disputed origin, perhaps lit. "gash, slit," from PIE *sker- "to cut," or lit. "sheath," from PIE *kut-no-, from base *(s)keu- "to conceal, hide." First known reference in Eng. is said to be c.1230 Oxford or London street name Gropecuntlane, presumably a haunt of prostitutes. Avoided in public speech since 15c.; considered obscene since 17c. Du. cognate de kont means "a bottom, an arse." Du. also has attractive poetic slang ways of expressing this part, such as liefdesgrot, lit. "cave of love," and vleesroos "rose of flesh." Alternate form cunny is attested from c.1720 but is certainly much earlier and forced a change in the pronunciation of coney (q.v.), but it was good for a pun while coney was still the common word for "rabbit": "A pox upon your Christian cockatrices! They cry, like poulterers' wives, 'No money, no coney.' " [Massinger, 1622]
Didn't mince words in those days, did they? Or at least when they did, they didn't beat around the bush. Oh wait.....that's not right either. I mean they still managed to get right to the point.
That's great stuff.
Sounds like Miss Sheehan (I remembered her name - I think) was spot on midwinter.
So midwinter, since you're using your Saturdays to freelance on the internet, I've got two questions for you.
1. I've seen newspapers omit the last comma before the 'and' in a list, like "crazychester is a scoundrel, a cretin and a knobcheese." It drives me crazy. Am I wrong to be driven by crazy by this?
2. I was corrected recently when someone asked "how are you doing?" and I responded "good." They said "well" is the only appropriate answer. Needless to say, I pulled his tongue out with a pair of pliers. But was he right?
1: The rules for this changed sometime during the years of 1989-1990. Technically speaking, one should be omitting the last [edit] comma.
2: Please, for the love of god, use the word "WELL."
1: The rules for this changed sometime during the years of 1989-1990. Technically speaking, one should be omitting the last apostrophe.
You mean 'comma', and indeed, all current style guides suggest omission of the last comma in a series. Technically, the comma is a separator, and so is 'and' in a series, so to use both would be redundant, and slow down the 'flow' of the sentence.
An example from Takao Suzuki's book, Words in Context, is truly in the spirit of this kind of Whorfian example
How many books did Takao Suzuki write? Many. But the commas, being retarded, and in the wrong place, would lead one to conclude Takao Suzuki wrote only one book, and it was called 'Words in Context'.
They are in the wrong place because they should be inverted commas. If you were brave and macho you could just hope that people would 'get' that the capitals in Words in Context would be enough to designate 'Tako Suzuki's book.'
That's pretty amazing to be able to locate a change in a language to within a year.
I would simply point out that it seems lots of newspaper style manuals don't mandate it while lots of academic style manuals do.
So neener.
I happened to be in an Honors English class at the time - the prof. was a language aficionado & loved to inform us about the latest & greatest conventions...while insisting we use said conventions.
In regard to newspapers, not sure if it's an old wive's tale or not...but I believe they are typically written utilizing 6th grade grammar & vocabulary. Well, 20 seconds with google.com yields shocking fruit
You mean 'comma', and indeed, all current style guides suggest omission of the last comma in a series. Technically, the comma is a separator, and so is 'and' in a series, so to use both would be redundant, and slow down the 'flow' of the sentence.
doh! Guess I had the little fella' burned onto my retinas. Thanks for pointing that out
I happened to be in an Honors English class at the time - the prof. was a language aficionado & loved to inform us about the latest & greatest conventions...while insisting we use said conventions.
In regard to newspapers, not sure if it's an old wive's tale or not...but I believe they are typically written utilizing 6th grade grammar & vocabulary. Well, 20 seconds with google.com yields shocking fruit
My pet peeve is people [edit: idiots] putting themselves first
"...so me and Mikey went into the office."
And it's becoming increasingly popular. Constantly on the radio, the 'boob-tube' and in my immediate vicinity there are individuals doing their best to butcher what little is left of the original grammatical constructs .
But I have found a solution: I'm moving to a non-English speaking nation (Italy) in a couple of years. At least the Italians have an excuse for not excercising English grammar correctly.
p.s. What makes this embarrasing for anyone born into the English language is that, for me, it is my SECOND language. It is deeply concerning (and terribly annoying at the same time) that so few have even an adequate grasp of their FIRST language.
My pet peeve is people [edit: idiots] putting themselves first
"...so me and Mikey went into the office."
And it's becoming increasingly popular. Constantly on the radio, the 'boob-tube' and in my immediate vicinity there are individuals doing their best to butcher what little is left of the original grammatical constructs .
But I have found a solution: I'm moving to a non-English speaking nation (Italy) in a couple of years. At least the Italians have an excuse for not excercising English grammar correctly.
p.s. What makes this embarrasing for anyone born into the English language is that, for me, it is my SECOND language. It is deeply concerning (and terribly annoying at the same time) that so few have even an adequate grasp of their FIRST language.
Don't even get me started about how people these days seem to think "whom" is simply more formal, so they use it when they want to sound fancy. "Have you spoken to the person whom bought the car?"
Comments
I understood it's older than 'coney', having a really ancient Indo-European root. Like 'queen', to which it's related. If I remember, a a 'cunt' is a sacred well in Sanskrit, but it's also got lots of things to do femininity.
In the Mahabharata, Kunti was the mother of the Pandavas, the good guys, one of whom was Arjuna, the co-star of the Bhagavad Gita. I think the Celtic version of Kali was also known as Cunti.
I love this stuff too. I just can't ever remember it.
That probably explains why a friend of a friend changed her name to Kunti Ratna when she became a Hare Krishna. Well, it goes some way to explaining it. Of course, nothing could ever fully explain changing your name to Kunti.
So is there any significance in "quaint" and "queen" sharing three letters? Seems to me we need info on the derivation of "quaint".
That probably explains why a friend of a friend changed her name to Kunti Ratna when she became a Hare Krishna. Well, it goes some way to explaining it. Of course, nothing could ever fully explain changing your name to Kunti.
So is there any significance in "quaint" and "queen" sharing three letters? Seems to me we need info on the derivation of "quaint".
I'm pretty sure all the "qu" words are Anglo-Saxon. The "gw" words are Welsh.
2. "Their" used in the singular. "Your child needs their instrument...."----
3. "Yous"----
quaint:
c.1225, "cunning, proud, ingenious," from O.Fr. cointe "pretty, clever, knowing," from L. cognitus "known," pp. of cognoscere "get or come to know well" (see cognizance). Sense of "old-fashioned but charming" is first attested 1795, and could describe the word itself, which had become rare after c.1700 (though it soon recovered popularity in this secondary sense). Chaucer used quaint and queynte as spellings of cunt in "Canterbury Tales" (1386), and Andrew Marvell may be punning on it similarly in "To His Coy Mistress" (1650).
cunt:
"female intercrural foramen," or, as some 18c. writers refer to it, "the monosyllable," M.E. cunte "female genitalia," akin to O.N. kunta, from P.Gmc. *kunton, of uncertain origin. Some suggest a link with L. cuneus "wedge," others to PIE base *geu- "hollow place," still others to PIE *gwen-, root of queen and Gk. gyne "woman." The form is similar to L. cunnus "female pudenda," which is likewise of disputed origin, perhaps lit. "gash, slit," from PIE *sker- "to cut," or lit. "sheath," from PIE *kut-no-, from base *(s)keu- "to conceal, hide." First known reference in Eng. is said to be c.1230 Oxford or London street name Gropecuntlane, presumably a haunt of prostitutes. Avoided in public speech since 15c.; considered obscene since 17c. Du. cognate de kont means "a bottom, an arse." Du. also has attractive poetic slang ways of expressing this part, such as liefdesgrot, lit. "cave of love," and vleesroos "rose of flesh." Alternate form cunny is attested from c.1720 but is certainly much earlier and forced a change in the pronunciation of coney (q.v.), but it was good for a pun while coney was still the common word for "rabbit": "A pox upon your Christian cockatrices! They cry, like poulterers' wives, 'No money, no coney.' " [Massinger, 1622]
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php
Gropecuntlane
Didn't mince words in those days, did they? Or at least when they did, they didn't beat around the bush. Oh wait.....that's not right either.
That's great stuff.
Sounds like Miss Sheehan (I remembered her name - I think) was spot on midwinter.
So midwinter, since you're using your Saturdays to freelance on the internet, I've got two questions for you.
1. I've seen newspapers omit the last comma before the 'and' in a list, like "crazychester is a scoundrel, a cretin and a knobcheese." It drives me crazy. Am I wrong to be driven by crazy by this?
2. I was corrected recently when someone asked "how are you doing?" and I responded "good." They said "well" is the only appropriate answer. Needless to say, I pulled his tongue out with a pair of pliers. But was he right?
1: The rules for this changed sometime during the years of 1989-1990. Technically speaking, one should be omitting the last [edit] comma.
2: Please, for the love of god, use the word "WELL."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM0SCTvp7KE
1: The rules for this changed sometime during the years of 1989-1990. Technically speaking, one should be omitting the last apostrophe.
You mean 'comma', and indeed, all current style guides suggest omission of the last comma in a series. Technically, the comma is a separator, and so is 'and' in a series, so to use both would be redundant, and slow down the 'flow' of the sentence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM0SCTvp7KE
Ok... reading that kid's profile, I decided to be nicer...
Even though it is a fake accent. Keep working at it, Sean!
1: The rules for this changed sometime during the years of 1989-1990. Technically speaking, one should be omitting the last apostrophe.
That's pretty amazing to be able to locate a change in a language to within a year.
I would simply point out that it seems lots of newspaper style manuals don't mandate it while lots of academic style manuals do.
So neener.
An example from Takao Suzuki's book, Words in Context, is truly in the spirit of this kind of Whorfian example
How many books did Takao Suzuki write? Many. But the commas, being retarded, and in the wrong place, would lead one to conclude Takao Suzuki wrote only one book, and it was called 'Words in Context'.
They are in the wrong place because they should be inverted commas. If you were brave and macho you could just hope that people would 'get' that the capitals in Words in Context would be enough to designate 'Tako Suzuki's book.'
I hate those commas.
That's pretty amazing to be able to locate a change in a language to within a year.
I would simply point out that it seems lots of newspaper style manuals don't mandate it while lots of academic style manuals do.
So neener.
I happened to be in an Honors English class at the time - the prof. was a language aficionado & loved to inform us about the latest & greatest conventions...while insisting we use said conventions.
In regard to newspapers, not sure if it's an old wive's tale or not...but I believe they are typically written utilizing 6th grade grammar & vocabulary. Well, 20 seconds with google.com yields shocking fruit
http://hamradio-online.com/commonsen...3rd-grade.html
You mean 'comma', and indeed, all current style guides suggest omission of the last comma in a series. Technically, the comma is a separator, and so is 'and' in a series, so to use both would be redundant, and slow down the 'flow' of the sentence.
doh! Guess I had the little fella' burned onto my retinas. Thanks for pointing that out
I happened to be in an Honors English class at the time - the prof. was a language aficionado & loved to inform us about the latest & greatest conventions...while insisting we use said conventions.
In regard to newspapers, not sure if it's an old wive's tale or not...but I believe they are typically written utilizing 6th grade grammar & vocabulary. Well, 20 seconds with google.com yields shocking fruit
http://hamradio-online.com/commonsen...3rd-grade.html
"Wives'" tale.
There's no such word as "wive". "Wives" is the plural, and the possessive form gets the apostrophe after the 's'.
Honors English, huh?
"Wives'" tale.
There's no such word as "wive". "Wives" is the plural, and the possessive form gets the apostrophe after the 's'.
Honors English, huh?
I think, actually, that it's wiv'es's's1's#
Now quit bugging me while I'm trying to grade papers from an honors English class I'm teaching.
"...so me and Mikey went into the office."
And it's becoming increasingly popular. Constantly on the radio, the 'boob-tube' and in my immediate vicinity there are individuals doing their best to butcher what little is left of the original grammatical constructs
But I have found a solution: I'm moving to a non-English speaking nation (Italy) in a couple of years. At least the Italians have an excuse for not excercising English grammar correctly.
p.s. What makes this embarrasing for anyone born into the English language is that, for me, it is my SECOND language. It is deeply concerning (and terribly annoying at the same time) that so few have even an adequate grasp of their FIRST language.
My pet peeve is people [edit: idiots] putting themselves first
"...so me and Mikey went into the office."
And it's becoming increasingly popular. Constantly on the radio, the 'boob-tube' and in my immediate vicinity there are individuals doing their best to butcher what little is left of the original grammatical constructs
But I have found a solution: I'm moving to a non-English speaking nation (Italy) in a couple of years. At least the Italians have an excuse for not excercising English grammar correctly.
p.s. What makes this embarrasing for anyone born into the English language is that, for me, it is my SECOND language. It is deeply concerning (and terribly annoying at the same time) that so few have even an adequate grasp of their FIRST language.
Don't even get me started about how people these days seem to think "whom" is simply more formal, so they use it when they want to sound fancy. "Have you spoken to the person whom bought the car?"
Grr.
Another couple (these are not errors in grammar but rather incorrect quoting of popular sayings):
1. What's good for the goose...
The saying is "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander"; not "What's good for the goose..."
2. The proof is in the pudding.
The saying is "The proof of the pudding is in the eating". The proof is in the eating, not in the pudding!
Cheers
Windows users don't have a sense of false security about their OS (though Mac users might
They have a false sense of security.
What gets me is the chronic misuse of I and me. People say "Between you and I" and "It's me". Yeesh!
Another couple (these are not errors in grammar but rather incorrect quoting of popular sayings):
1. What's good for the goose...
The saying is "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander"; not "What's good for the goose..."
2. The proof is in the pudding.
The saying is "The proof of the pudding is in the eating". The proof is in the eating, not in the pudding!
Cheers
Oh don't get me going with incorrect sayings...
"Here, here." No. Wrong. Look it up.
No!
It's not brain surgery or it's not rocket science. But for crying out loud, there is no such thing as a rocket surgeon or rocket surgery.