Interesting Tidbits for the History Buff (Origin of Sayings)

reply to post by froglegs79


Interesting point .. and it could very well be! but typeset's weren't out until later, correct? So , I'd assume the pints and quarts could be the origin... very good but who really knows?
...Keep in mind that some of our history is being overwritten - replaced... which is another topic.

Many of these are horribly inaccurate examples of "folk etymology," and do great disservice to those who really do wish to learn origins of meanings. (I don't blame the OP, but I do blame those who make these things up and pass them off as real.)

I'm not claiming they're all wrong, but as a single example, here's an excerpt from the Wikipedia article on "Face (sociological concept)"; that is, the etymology of losing and saving face:

Face (sociological concept)

Terminology:

"The concept of face is, of course, Chinese in origin" (Ho 1975:867), yet many languages have "face" terms that metaphorically mean "prestige; honor; reputation." Marcel Mauss, who sociologically studied the Kwakwaka'wakw (formerly known as Kwakiutl) and Haida nations in British Columbia, interpreted the Kwak'wala word q'elsem (lit. "rotten face") meaning "stingy potlatch-giver; one who gives no feast."

Kwakiutl and Haida noblemen have the same notion of 'face' as the Chinese mandarin or officer. It is said of one of the great mythical chiefs who gave no feast that he had a 'rotten face.' The expression is more apt than it is even in China; for to lose one's face is to lose one's spirit, which is truly the 'face', the dancing mask, the right to incarnate a spirit and wear an emblem or totem. It is the veritable persona which is at stake, and it can be lost in the potlatch just as it can be lost in the game of gift-giving, in war, or through some error in ritual. (1954:38)

Michael Carr (1992, 1993) lexicographically investigated "face; prestige" dictionary forms in Chinese, Japanese, and English. Within this sample, Chinese dictionaries include 98 forms, e.g., sipo lian 撕破臉 (lit. "rip up face") "have no consideration for someone's feelings"; Japanese dictionaries list 89, e.g., kao o uru 顔を売る (lit. "sell face") "become popular; gain influence"; and English dictionaries include 5 forms, e.g., lose face (borrowed from Chinese diulian 丟臉 "lose face"). Carr found that the Chinese and Japanese lexicons have roughly equal numbers of words for "losing face" and "saving face", while English has more for "saving face.

I have nothing but disrespect for those who sit around and imagine these etymologies up in their own minds, and then pass them off as being historical and true; and I encourage everyone to question this sort of thing and call out the dishonest originators every time.

In other words: Do your own research--and deny ignorance....

reply to post by Ex_CT2



Hi ExCT2

Had to log back in when I saw your post! Star for that and how verrry true!
I appreciate your alerting everyone to this.

I too despise the lies that are replacing truth. Before passing them off as truth, one must know without a doubt - the facts.

The problem oftime is: How can one find out for sure? With everyone having a different story. (so many truths going around) with No proofs to be had.....

Curious as to how you knew that article wasn't correct . Mismatched info from other sources or what? Please, am very interested in how you knew your article ex. was a lie.



.

Was hoping EX would have a reply by now. As stated in OP, no source -these SEEMED legit. and to please correct if these were inaccurate.

He was right, that we shouldn't assume these as fact. So am curious if anyone can prove any of these wrong.
I'm still kind of lost on his reply /example, so if anyone has a hint at what I am missing, I'd appreciate it, if you would let me in on the secret.

Thanks in advance! and from here on out, I guess we should refer to these as ''rumored'' origins.

Originally posted by SeekerLou
Was hoping EX would have a reply by now. As stated in OP, no source -these SEEMED legit. and to please correct if these were inaccurate.

He was right, that we shouldn't assume these as fact. So am curious if anyone can prove any of these wrong.
I'm still kind of lost on his reply /example, so if anyone has a hint at what I am missing, I'd appreciate it, if you would let me in on the secret.

Thanks in advance! and for here on out, I guess we should refer to these as ''rumored'' origins.

here's Snopes' take on it.

www.snopes.com...

reply to post by Pauligirl


Aha! Thank you so much for this Pauligirl. I can see the light now
Much appreciated.

Originally posted by SeekerLou
reply to post by Ex_CT2

 

Hi ExCT2

Had to log back in when I saw your post! Star for that and how verrry true!
I appreciate your alerting everyone to this.

I too despise the lies that are replacing truth. Before passing them off as truth, one must know without a doubt - the facts.

The problem oftime is: How can one find out for sure? With everyone having a different story. (so many truths going around) with No proofs to be had.....

Curious as to how you knew that article wasn't correct . Mismatched info from other sources or what? Please, am very interested in how you knew your article ex. was a lie.



.

edit on 30-3-2012 by SeekerLou because: (no reason given)

My apologies. I was on my way to another forum when I saw your original post, so I thought I'd pop in and check it out. And then I forgot to come back.

The fact is that I've simply had an interest in etymology since I was a kid--some 50-odd years ago. I can usually spot a "clinker" pretty quickly. And when I do, I go look it up for myself. In this case, I'd seen several of these before (one of those viral emails people used to send out, no doubt).

This sort of thing happens quite a lot--and it's not just limited to etymology. For instance: At my office I'm responsible for putting together our product catalogue. When I have a "white space" where I don't have enough room for product info, or at the end of a page, I like to put "factoids" there. Such as: "Leonardo da Vinci sketched plans for a humanoid robot in the 15th Century."

Now, that's a fact that's easily checked--there are thousands of sources for it. But there are people who have put together "fake factoids," for whatever reason, they went viral, and now they're all the hell over the Internet. And without verification and research, you very often can't tell the real from the fake. It's made my job a nightmare--and what's worse is that there are a lot of people out there who don't know the difference, who take them as fact, and will never be the wiser.

(I have noticed that a lot of the "factoids" I find on the Internet were originally created for Dave Letterman, for the segment he used to do called "The Federal Bureau of Miscellaneous Information." There must be thousands of the g---damned things out there polluting the Internet. It makes me insane.)

Anyway: Sorry I didn't check back in earlier....

reply to post by Ex_CT2


Hi ExCT2.
No appologies necessary! and
Bless your dear heart. Thank you so much for your informative post. I was unsure of OP but they about had me hook, line and sinker.

From now on, I will snope everything to see their investigation into things even on entymology . Who'da thunk that would have been there? I have actually pointed people to that site in the past with the BGates giveaway scams, etc.
. Geez, Ex, I didn't realize all of these things, and I truly appreciate the share of your knowledge/experience! Very interesting . I'm sure your job can and does get to you but what in the world would they or wE do without ya?!

..Thank you for coming back in to explain. -As I'm sure this will help to keep us on our toes . I, for one, will be on guard. Seems there are lies on just about everything these days. Grr... yeah they make me weary too!

You're a good man! And to be honest, this wouldn't be the first time that I have learned from you. Respect and salute to ya, buddy.