WEBVTT - Words with Kel Richards – 6th June

0:00:05.840 --> 0:00:15.480
<v Speaker 1>Sounds and now a night's Words with Cal Richards. Yes

0:00:15.560 --> 0:00:17.720
<v Speaker 1>words with Kel Richards, and Kel of course is with

0:00:17.840 --> 0:00:20.280
<v Speaker 1>us every Thursday night to talk words. And don't forget

0:00:20.280 --> 0:00:22.560
<v Speaker 1>his fantastic website which has links to all of his

0:00:22.600 --> 0:00:27.080
<v Speaker 1>great publications. You get a daily missive from him oz

0:00:27.320 --> 0:00:28.600
<v Speaker 1>words dot com dot au.

0:00:28.720 --> 0:00:31.680
<v Speaker 2>Good evening, sir, good evening, sir. Really nice to be here.

0:00:31.760 --> 0:00:34.080
<v Speaker 1>Now, let me just mention this headline I saw in

0:00:34.120 --> 0:00:38.920
<v Speaker 1>the Telegraph, because this this this list of the Bougist.

0:00:38.960 --> 0:00:41.600
<v Speaker 1>And I'm told everyone here says, I've got someone saying

0:00:41.600 --> 0:00:43.199
<v Speaker 1>to me it's b o u G and it's a

0:00:43.240 --> 0:00:45.800
<v Speaker 1>hard g. Now I think it's a b o u G.

0:00:46.000 --> 0:00:50.960
<v Speaker 1>I s t bougist. Francis has heard it, Charlie's heard it.

0:00:51.000 --> 0:00:52.800
<v Speaker 1>A lot of the younger people here have used it.

0:00:52.800 --> 0:00:54.480
<v Speaker 1>It's kind of a play on bourgeois.

0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:57.000
<v Speaker 2>I think exactly. Tell us, well, it is a plan

0:00:57.080 --> 0:01:02.319
<v Speaker 2>on bourgeois. Quickly, Da dashed into the Oxford database, as

0:01:02.320 --> 0:01:05.960
<v Speaker 2>one does, and discovered they've found it back in nineteen

0:01:06.040 --> 0:01:09.080
<v Speaker 2>sixty six when it started off as Black American slang,

0:01:10.000 --> 0:01:14.360
<v Speaker 2>and it was a contraction of bourgeois. So you were bougie.

0:01:14.160 --> 0:01:17.120
<v Speaker 2>The s the eest at the end, it may well be.

0:01:17.200 --> 0:01:21.680
<v Speaker 2>The Telegraph added, bogie has been a common expression. When

0:01:21.720 --> 0:01:24.440
<v Speaker 2>it was first coined in America, it was meant as

0:01:24.480 --> 0:01:27.800
<v Speaker 2>a disparaging expression, right. In other words, it was putting

0:01:27.800 --> 0:01:29.600
<v Speaker 2>you down because you thought you were better than other

0:01:29.640 --> 0:01:32.679
<v Speaker 2>people or whatever. And mind you, not all of the

0:01:32.720 --> 0:01:36.200
<v Speaker 2>dictionaries agree with that. The Cambridge says belonging to or

0:01:36.200 --> 0:01:38.600
<v Speaker 2>typical of the middle class, especially in giving a lot

0:01:38.640 --> 0:01:41.720
<v Speaker 2>of importance to money, education, social class, and in liking

0:01:41.800 --> 0:01:47.400
<v Speaker 2>or what expensive and unusual things. Mind you, the Urban Dictionary.

0:01:47.560 --> 0:01:51.000
<v Speaker 2>The Urban Dictionary thinks it's disparaging. The Urban Dictionary says

0:01:51.000 --> 0:01:55.160
<v Speaker 2>bougie means people pretending to or thinking they are high

0:01:55.240 --> 0:01:58.600
<v Speaker 2>class when they're really not and they don't realize it.

0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:02.800
<v Speaker 1>Sydney's bougie is hot spots for celebrities.

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:03.200
<v Speaker 2>There you go.

0:02:03.400 --> 0:02:05.040
<v Speaker 1>So that was the headline they came up with, and

0:02:05.080 --> 0:02:06.400
<v Speaker 1>I looked at it and I thought, ah, I've got

0:02:06.400 --> 0:02:08.800
<v Speaker 1>the personal perfect person that running the rule over this one.

0:02:08.919 --> 0:02:11.519
<v Speaker 2>And there's a lovely line here in the Cambridge Dictionary

0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:16.040
<v Speaker 2>which says, quote oat milk, sawy milk, almond milk, bougie.

0:02:16.080 --> 0:02:18.320
<v Speaker 2>People like any milk that doesn't actually come from a cow.

0:02:19.240 --> 0:02:20.280
<v Speaker 2>That's that's being bougie.

0:02:20.400 --> 0:02:22.200
<v Speaker 1>All right, let me go. George's got something on this.

0:02:22.280 --> 0:02:26.720
<v Speaker 3>Hello George, Yeah, John, I know you like your soul music,

0:02:26.880 --> 0:02:29.880
<v Speaker 3>so it's thought. I I think you're talking about boogie

0:02:29.919 --> 0:02:31.760
<v Speaker 3>and kel that's correct.

0:02:31.840 --> 0:02:35.359
<v Speaker 4>But the very very well known and much.

0:02:36.680 --> 0:02:41.639
<v Speaker 5>Late seventies soul classified the pit's called Bougie.

0:02:41.320 --> 0:02:43.519
<v Speaker 6>Borgie, and that's exactly.

0:02:44.480 --> 0:02:47.239
<v Speaker 5>They were talking about that song. It's a classic song.

0:02:48.480 --> 0:02:52.639
<v Speaker 1>Sydney's Bougie Bougie. This is Gladys Knight and the Pips

0:02:52.680 --> 0:02:54.320
<v Speaker 1>from the late seventies. Where might try and find a

0:02:54.320 --> 0:02:54.880
<v Speaker 1>bit of that if.

0:02:54.800 --> 0:02:57.320
<v Speaker 2>We can, Yeah, that'd be great. Yeah, because and I

0:02:57.400 --> 0:02:59.880
<v Speaker 2>presume what he's doing in the song is putting down people,

0:03:00.200 --> 0:03:03.760
<v Speaker 2>because at that time it was definitely meant a disparaging term.

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:05.920
<v Speaker 1>George's lines are a little bit dodgy, but we got

0:03:05.960 --> 0:03:07.680
<v Speaker 1>the message. Ye, we walk down and have a listen

0:03:07.680 --> 0:03:09.600
<v Speaker 1>to that one. Well done, Thank you so much for that.

0:03:09.639 --> 0:03:12.480
<v Speaker 1>One three one eight seven three is the number word

0:03:12.520 --> 0:03:14.720
<v Speaker 1>of the week. It's often a word, it's often just

0:03:14.760 --> 0:03:17.400
<v Speaker 1>a phrase. This week it's a phrase and I'm very interested.

0:03:17.639 --> 0:03:20.680
<v Speaker 2>Out of sorts. I mean, we all are occasionally out

0:03:20.720 --> 0:03:21.040
<v Speaker 2>of sort.

0:03:21.120 --> 0:03:22.880
<v Speaker 1>Hey, feeling like kell I've been out of sorts?

0:03:22.919 --> 0:03:25.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, exactly like that, older than I would have thought.

0:03:25.800 --> 0:03:29.200
<v Speaker 2>Goes back to sixteen twenty one, covers a multitude of conditions,

0:03:29.200 --> 0:03:32.560
<v Speaker 2>both physical and mental. The Oxford that says it means

0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:35.800
<v Speaker 2>not in the usual normal condition of good health or spirits,

0:03:36.360 --> 0:03:39.360
<v Speaker 2>that kind of thing. But why sorts now? One theory

0:03:39.440 --> 0:03:42.000
<v Speaker 2>is talking about being in or out of sorts? Goes

0:03:42.040 --> 0:03:44.760
<v Speaker 2>back to the early days of printing, when type metal

0:03:44.800 --> 0:03:47.840
<v Speaker 2>type was set by hand, and you had two cases,

0:03:47.840 --> 0:03:49.840
<v Speaker 2>the top case with the upper coast letters in and

0:03:50.120 --> 0:03:52.960
<v Speaker 2>the bottom case with the lower case letters in, and

0:03:53.080 --> 0:03:58.840
<v Speaker 2>those metal letters, individual letters on metal were called sorts.

0:04:00.040 --> 0:04:02.240
<v Speaker 2>When your case was getting low, if you've been setting

0:04:02.280 --> 0:04:05.760
<v Speaker 2>a lot, you were running out of sorts, and so

0:04:05.880 --> 0:04:09.839
<v Speaker 2>you couldn't keep typesetting because you were out of sorts.

0:04:09.600 --> 0:04:13.080
<v Speaker 2>There's a nice joke that Benjamin Franklin of all people,

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:16.120
<v Speaker 2>makes because he was a printer, about being out of

0:04:16.200 --> 0:04:20.159
<v Speaker 2>sorts and referring to printer's type setting his sorts. So

0:04:20.240 --> 0:04:22.200
<v Speaker 2>that may well be the source of it.

0:04:22.440 --> 0:04:24.920
<v Speaker 1>Okay, all right, so there you go, out of sorts. Now.

0:04:25.080 --> 0:04:27.400
<v Speaker 1>Just Brian had this one I'm interested because I've got

0:04:27.400 --> 0:04:30.600
<v Speaker 1>a young man who I know well, Dave his Dragon Supporter,

0:04:30.680 --> 0:04:33.719
<v Speaker 1>lives in my area, and I know when he often,

0:04:34.320 --> 0:04:36.640
<v Speaker 1>usually when someone's dropped the ball on whatever, he goes, Oh,

0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:39.880
<v Speaker 1>spare me days. He's spare me days. It's a really

0:04:39.880 --> 0:04:41.080
<v Speaker 1>old expression, isn't it.

0:04:41.080 --> 0:04:43.960
<v Speaker 2>It's a very ies of you expression. It goes back

0:04:43.960 --> 0:04:47.599
<v Speaker 2>to about nineteen sixteen, which means it quite possibly was

0:04:47.640 --> 0:04:49.440
<v Speaker 2>born in the trenches. It may have begun as a

0:04:49.440 --> 0:04:52.599
<v Speaker 2>digger expression. There's a brilliant book I've got called Digger Dialects,

0:04:52.880 --> 0:04:54.680
<v Speaker 2>and I've got to admit I should have gone there,

0:04:54.720 --> 0:04:58.240
<v Speaker 2>and I didn't go there, but about nineteen sixteen. It

0:04:58.279 --> 0:04:59.920
<v Speaker 2>was originally it's sort of meant to be in a

0:05:00.120 --> 0:05:02.640
<v Speaker 2>expression of surprise. But it grows out of the fact

0:05:02.800 --> 0:05:07.240
<v Speaker 2>that the word spare originally meant protect protect me from injury.

0:05:07.320 --> 0:05:10.520
<v Speaker 2>Oh really spare me So another words in a oh

0:05:10.600 --> 0:05:13.359
<v Speaker 2>you know the days again made if this is going on,

0:05:13.400 --> 0:05:16.039
<v Speaker 2>Oh the days are getting to spare me days was

0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:19.240
<v Speaker 2>the idea, I don't want all this, don't inflict this

0:05:19.320 --> 0:05:21.920
<v Speaker 2>on me, Spare me days. So that's what it grows

0:05:21.960 --> 0:05:22.160
<v Speaker 2>out of.

0:05:22.400 --> 0:05:23.960
<v Speaker 1>Fantastic, all right, what I want to do is take

0:05:23.960 --> 0:05:25.599
<v Speaker 1>a break, come back in the moment. We've got people

0:05:25.600 --> 0:05:27.279
<v Speaker 1>on the line who want to talk to you directly.

0:05:27.360 --> 0:05:30.159
<v Speaker 1>Kel got questions on the text line. We've got emails

0:05:30.200 --> 0:05:31.919
<v Speaker 1>as well, and I've got one from earlier in the

0:05:31.960 --> 0:05:35.880
<v Speaker 1>week and one of our programs that I harvested as well,

0:05:35.920 --> 0:05:38.719
<v Speaker 1>So I'm picking stuff up all week for you, so

0:05:38.920 --> 0:05:41.479
<v Speaker 1>we'll get a ruling as well. Where's my here it is.

0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:45.479
<v Speaker 1>I've got the ready to go very good at twenty

0:05:45.520 --> 0:05:48.839
<v Speaker 1>minutes past ten on three seven three is the number

0:05:48.839 --> 0:05:52.039
<v Speaker 1>of thanks to George with the Bogie Bougie, that song

0:05:52.080 --> 0:05:53.800
<v Speaker 1>from Gladys Knight and the Pipsica, A little bit of

0:05:53.839 --> 0:05:55.760
<v Speaker 1>the little bit of the chorus of that one, have

0:05:55.839 --> 0:06:06.320
<v Speaker 1>we here? It is? There it is, and they've just

0:06:06.360 --> 0:06:09.040
<v Speaker 1>adopted it a bit or adapted a bit with bougiists.

0:06:09.080 --> 0:06:11.120
<v Speaker 1>So there you go. All right, fantastic, Thank you so

0:06:11.200 --> 0:06:11.560
<v Speaker 1>much for.

0:06:11.560 --> 0:06:14.320
<v Speaker 2>That, John, You and I and all the other baby

0:06:14.320 --> 0:06:16.800
<v Speaker 2>boomers listening. They've just learned something that we didn't know

0:06:17.000 --> 0:06:17.320
<v Speaker 2>we have.

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:20.440
<v Speaker 1>Actually, yeah, and maybe a few genex's as well. I suspect.

0:06:20.720 --> 0:06:22.400
<v Speaker 1>Let's go to John. Hello, John.

0:06:23.920 --> 0:06:30.680
<v Speaker 3>Oh kel Hi, John seventy a seventy four IP fan

0:06:30.839 --> 0:06:31.520
<v Speaker 3>by the way.

0:06:31.440 --> 0:06:33.320
<v Speaker 1>Ah, all right, well all that music would have been

0:06:33.360 --> 0:06:36.200
<v Speaker 1>played on the Great four IP. Yes, yeah, color Radio

0:06:36.320 --> 0:06:37.440
<v Speaker 1>four IP wasn't.

0:06:37.240 --> 0:06:38.480
<v Speaker 2>Wise home of the good guys.

0:06:38.520 --> 0:06:38.960
<v Speaker 1>That's right.

0:06:39.080 --> 0:06:41.919
<v Speaker 3>Yes, you're a bit of a character. Back then your

0:06:42.000 --> 0:06:48.880
<v Speaker 3>voice wasn't as beautiful as it is now. But anyway, as.

0:06:48.760 --> 0:06:50.919
<v Speaker 2>I got it took. As I get older, both visually

0:06:50.960 --> 0:06:53.560
<v Speaker 2>and verbally, I get closer to George Cloning. It's just

0:06:53.600 --> 0:06:54.280
<v Speaker 2>the way it is.

0:06:54.200 --> 0:06:55.840
<v Speaker 1>There, you go, all right, fantastic.

0:06:56.880 --> 0:07:00.440
<v Speaker 3>Between Gympie and mirror Borough, they have bees roads signs

0:07:00.480 --> 0:07:05.720
<v Speaker 3>that are trivia questions on them. I always got the answer,

0:07:06.400 --> 0:07:09.360
<v Speaker 3>but I could never get the question because the sign

0:07:09.480 --> 0:07:16.880
<v Speaker 3>was hidden by a bit of tree. The word petreature, petriture.

0:07:17.080 --> 0:07:19.720
<v Speaker 3>I'm trying. I'm trying to stump you here.

0:07:20.040 --> 0:07:20.720
<v Speaker 1>You want to get there?

0:07:20.880 --> 0:07:23.840
<v Speaker 3>This is like how do you spell it? I know

0:07:24.000 --> 0:07:26.080
<v Speaker 3>the answer, but I wanted to see if I could

0:07:26.120 --> 0:07:27.560
<v Speaker 3>get stump kill on it.

0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:29.720
<v Speaker 2>Well, I'm trying to pick it up, So how do

0:07:29.760 --> 0:07:31.840
<v Speaker 2>you spell it? E?

0:07:31.840 --> 0:07:36.000
<v Speaker 3>E T R I C H O R.

0:07:36.280 --> 0:07:41.400
<v Speaker 2>Okay, I've got a feeling. Now I haven't opened up

0:07:41.400 --> 0:07:43.800
<v Speaker 2>the Oxford yet. I've got a feeling It is the

0:07:43.840 --> 0:07:48.000
<v Speaker 2>smell of coming rain. It's like the smell of the

0:07:48.080 --> 0:07:50.640
<v Speaker 2>dust and the coming rain when a rainstorm is approaching.

0:07:50.800 --> 0:07:53.160
<v Speaker 2>Am I getting close? Oh?

0:07:53.400 --> 0:07:57.440
<v Speaker 3>Mate? A class plus he.

0:07:57.400 --> 0:08:00.560
<v Speaker 1>Didn't open his computer. I can verify it very good,

0:08:00.760 --> 0:08:01.400
<v Speaker 1>that's what it is.

0:08:01.640 --> 0:08:02.120
<v Speaker 4>I see.

0:08:03.040 --> 0:08:04.440
<v Speaker 2>It's a wonderful word, isn't.

0:08:04.280 --> 0:08:06.600
<v Speaker 3>I can't believe. I can't believe you got that?

0:08:07.040 --> 0:08:09.200
<v Speaker 1>So how would you use it? Petrature is the smell?

0:08:09.280 --> 0:08:11.400
<v Speaker 1>So so you could just you could be walking around

0:08:11.400 --> 0:08:14.000
<v Speaker 1>with your mat petri.

0:08:14.080 --> 0:08:16.160
<v Speaker 2>Sure there was a whiff of petra. Sure there a whiff?

0:08:16.200 --> 0:08:18.280
<v Speaker 1>Is that a here's a John?

0:08:18.520 --> 0:08:20.520
<v Speaker 2>And it really is the case when rain is coming

0:08:20.520 --> 0:08:22.600
<v Speaker 2>you can often smell it. There was there was a

0:08:22.680 --> 0:08:24.760
<v Speaker 2>smell in the air, and I think it is dust

0:08:24.800 --> 0:08:27.200
<v Speaker 2>that's been stirred up by rain that's falling not too

0:08:27.200 --> 0:08:29.679
<v Speaker 2>far away. And you can spell rain coming, can't you? John?

0:08:30.120 --> 0:08:30.680
<v Speaker 1>Yeah?

0:08:30.800 --> 0:08:33.240
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I didn't think there'd be a word for that.

0:08:33.480 --> 0:08:34.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, but it's wonderful that there is.

0:08:35.200 --> 0:08:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Can we write it down?

0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:42.600
<v Speaker 3>I'll tell you what, mane. That's I'm just beside myself

0:08:42.600 --> 0:08:44.480
<v Speaker 3>that you got it. That's good enough for me.

0:08:44.880 --> 0:08:46.800
<v Speaker 2>Very good mate, that I looked it up A long,

0:08:46.880 --> 0:08:50.080
<v Speaker 2>long time ago, ten, ten, fifteen years ago, and suddenly

0:08:50.120 --> 0:08:52.679
<v Speaker 2>that brain cell opened and reminded me of what it was.

0:08:52.760 --> 0:08:55.120
<v Speaker 1>All right, look and look, thank you for very much, John.

0:08:55.160 --> 0:08:59.000
<v Speaker 1>And in fact we've got David's senses a note petriture, smell

0:08:59.040 --> 0:09:01.360
<v Speaker 1>of wet roads. So that's what we're talking about here.

0:09:01.400 --> 0:09:03.720
<v Speaker 1>And I can verify this because over the years on

0:09:03.840 --> 0:09:07.040
<v Speaker 1>radio there have been people who've had armies of researchers

0:09:07.040 --> 0:09:09.640
<v Speaker 1>and so when someone asks the question, they go no,

0:09:09.720 --> 0:09:12.160
<v Speaker 1>I think about that, and the answers to being provided.

0:09:12.200 --> 0:09:15.400
<v Speaker 1>But kel had nothing, nothing open, nothing, So well done,

0:09:15.559 --> 0:09:16.000
<v Speaker 1>very good.

0:09:16.080 --> 0:09:17.679
<v Speaker 2>I'm still looking at poop. That's what I've got to

0:09:17.679 --> 0:09:18.480
<v Speaker 2>open on my computer.

0:09:18.520 --> 0:09:20.320
<v Speaker 1>Well, lang on, you've given this away, so can we

0:09:20.520 --> 0:09:22.720
<v Speaker 1>This came Look, this was a couple of days ago,

0:09:22.920 --> 0:09:26.560
<v Speaker 1>and I know this happens. I reckon every few months.

0:09:26.840 --> 0:09:29.600
<v Speaker 1>Somewhere in the country. There's a debate, there's an argument.

0:09:29.640 --> 0:09:33.840
<v Speaker 1>There's a dispute over people picking up after their dogs,

0:09:34.440 --> 0:09:37.160
<v Speaker 1>and it can they're variations of whether they should be

0:09:37.200 --> 0:09:40.600
<v Speaker 1>putting it in people's bins, whether people do the fake

0:09:40.679 --> 0:09:43.040
<v Speaker 1>pick up, what you do with the stuff that's in

0:09:43.080 --> 0:09:47.120
<v Speaker 1>the bags. But the concern that one of our listeners

0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:49.360
<v Speaker 1>and Clinton Maynard was dealing with this on the Drive

0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:51.000
<v Speaker 1>Show and he was taught with the concern of one

0:09:51.000 --> 0:09:53.319
<v Speaker 1>of our listeners was not about the issue, but more

0:09:53.360 --> 0:09:56.440
<v Speaker 1>about the language that Maynard had used to have a listen.

0:09:56.960 --> 0:09:58.719
<v Speaker 7>I'm in trouble with Danny. So Danny's just sent a

0:09:58.760 --> 0:10:01.600
<v Speaker 7>text business saying it's dog poo. Pop is American? Please

0:10:01.679 --> 0:10:04.080
<v Speaker 7>only use the word pooh. I was trying to actually

0:10:04.600 --> 0:10:07.000
<v Speaker 7>censor myself there. I thought maybe poop was an easier

0:10:07.000 --> 0:10:09.360
<v Speaker 7>way of getting away with saying pooh. Okay, Danny, I'll

0:10:09.360 --> 0:10:09.800
<v Speaker 7>stick to it.

0:10:09.880 --> 0:10:10.400
<v Speaker 2>Dog pooh.

0:10:10.520 --> 0:10:12.400
<v Speaker 1>He said it all there, so we have poop and pooh.

0:10:12.480 --> 0:10:16.200
<v Speaker 1>But poop is pup American?

0:10:16.360 --> 0:10:20.560
<v Speaker 2>No, No, it's British. Recorded from eighteen ninety. It comes

0:10:20.559 --> 0:10:23.560
<v Speaker 2>from a Germanic source word quite common in Germanic languages,

0:10:24.240 --> 0:10:26.959
<v Speaker 2>and it always means the same thing, defication, although it's

0:10:26.960 --> 0:10:29.360
<v Speaker 2>got two meanings. It either means defication or it means

0:10:29.400 --> 0:10:33.760
<v Speaker 2>breaking wind, so the meanings are very tasteful. But there's

0:10:33.760 --> 0:10:36.040
<v Speaker 2>there's similar words in Afrikaans and Dutch and so on,

0:10:36.200 --> 0:10:38.480
<v Speaker 2>so it comes from a Germanic background. It's British, it's

0:10:38.480 --> 0:10:42.560
<v Speaker 2>not American, so you know no problem. Clinton is allowed

0:10:42.559 --> 0:10:42.800
<v Speaker 2>to hear.

0:10:42.800 --> 0:10:45.960
<v Speaker 1>He's right, and the fellow that took him to task

0:10:46.080 --> 0:10:46.400
<v Speaker 1>is wrong.

0:10:46.480 --> 0:10:48.480
<v Speaker 2>The man who said it was American is wrong.

0:10:48.880 --> 0:10:52.920
<v Speaker 1>Very good. You mentioned an excellent word there, because sometimes

0:10:52.920 --> 0:10:56.280
<v Speaker 1>I'll find myself, you know, when you're something egregious happens.

0:10:56.280 --> 0:10:58.920
<v Speaker 1>That's a great word itself. So something happens and you

0:10:59.040 --> 0:11:04.280
<v Speaker 1>want to say that, it's usually a politician has and

0:11:04.320 --> 0:11:08.120
<v Speaker 1>you want to say they have sahat, I might say

0:11:08.120 --> 0:11:10.760
<v Speaker 1>it on their constituents. Yes, And so I said, well,

0:11:10.800 --> 0:11:14.280
<v Speaker 1>they've defecated on their constituents, and I think that's actually even.

0:11:14.760 --> 0:11:16.680
<v Speaker 1>It's actually got a bit of a bit of style

0:11:16.720 --> 0:11:18.800
<v Speaker 1>about it, and that's what they have actually done.

0:11:18.960 --> 0:11:21.440
<v Speaker 2>It's a very powerful way of saying it because no

0:11:21.480 --> 0:11:23.720
<v Speaker 2>one can complain you're using bad language because you're not.

0:11:24.160 --> 0:11:26.800
<v Speaker 2>But what you're saying is something very and you're saying

0:11:26.840 --> 0:11:29.120
<v Speaker 2>it in a classy way. So keep it up, John,

0:11:29.320 --> 0:11:29.880
<v Speaker 2>Very good.

0:11:29.800 --> 0:11:33.520
<v Speaker 1>Very good. Now, Tom is when I said pedants, start

0:11:33.559 --> 0:11:35.800
<v Speaker 1>your engines at the start of this hour. One of

0:11:35.800 --> 0:11:39.880
<v Speaker 1>my favorite pedants who textas is Tom now, and he's

0:11:39.960 --> 0:11:41.680
<v Speaker 1>raised something that I've said a lot. I said, I'm

0:11:41.679 --> 0:11:44.680
<v Speaker 1>beside myself I've got to say, I'm beside myself. Now.

0:11:45.000 --> 0:11:47.920
<v Speaker 1>Our fellow who has got their answer, said he was

0:11:47.960 --> 0:11:51.920
<v Speaker 1>beside himself. Tom says, I hope you should have replied,

0:11:51.960 --> 0:11:53.640
<v Speaker 1>I hope you both enjoy the rest of the night.

0:11:53.720 --> 0:11:55.480
<v Speaker 1>But that's an interesting expression, isn't it.

0:11:55.520 --> 0:11:57.680
<v Speaker 2>We have talked about this once before, and it goes

0:11:57.720 --> 0:12:00.800
<v Speaker 2>back to the idea that somehow, rather you'reitor, your soul

0:12:00.920 --> 0:12:04.280
<v Speaker 2>gets so distressed it sort of exits your body and

0:12:04.400 --> 0:12:06.880
<v Speaker 2>parks itself beside you. It goes so it goes back

0:12:06.880 --> 0:12:08.760
<v Speaker 2>to the Middle Ages, goes back a long way. But

0:12:08.960 --> 0:12:11.240
<v Speaker 2>it's that kind of idea that I'm so distressed, I'm

0:12:11.280 --> 0:12:12.040
<v Speaker 2>beside myself.

0:12:12.160 --> 0:12:14.199
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, all right, And can.

0:12:14.040 --> 0:12:18.439
<v Speaker 2>I say with Formula one racing, they used to say, gentlemen,

0:12:18.840 --> 0:12:22.320
<v Speaker 2>start your engines, and because we have to have gender

0:12:22.400 --> 0:12:25.640
<v Speaker 2>non specific terms, and us drivers start your engines. And

0:12:25.840 --> 0:12:27.320
<v Speaker 2>I think it's not as good.

0:12:27.400 --> 0:12:29.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but what's going to happen when because there are

0:12:29.160 --> 0:12:31.000
<v Speaker 1>women who are driving, And in fact we've had this

0:12:31.000 --> 0:12:34.199
<v Speaker 1>conversation actually in the same way that it's taken a

0:12:34.240 --> 0:12:37.120
<v Speaker 1>long time. Now we have probably the best riders in

0:12:37.160 --> 0:12:39.720
<v Speaker 1>the country, a couple two or three this Jamie Carr

0:12:39.880 --> 0:12:43.199
<v Speaker 1>James MacDonald. It's logical that women would be as good

0:12:43.240 --> 0:12:46.920
<v Speaker 1>as jockeys as men because especially because of the weight

0:12:47.000 --> 0:12:49.640
<v Speaker 1>issue and the way they ride the horses. That reason

0:12:49.640 --> 0:12:51.320
<v Speaker 1>why women would be able to be as good as

0:12:51.360 --> 0:12:53.320
<v Speaker 1>a Formula one driver as a male.

0:12:53.559 --> 0:12:56.080
<v Speaker 2>It depends entirely on how much strength is involved, because

0:12:56.080 --> 0:12:58.560
<v Speaker 2>if you've got a Y chromosome, on average, people with

0:12:58.640 --> 0:13:01.480
<v Speaker 2>Y chromosomes tend to be like larger, faster, and stronger

0:13:01.520 --> 0:13:03.920
<v Speaker 2>than people who lack a WHY chromosome. And I don't

0:13:03.960 --> 0:13:06.440
<v Speaker 2>know how much strength is involved in driving the Formula one.

0:13:06.320 --> 0:13:08.920
<v Speaker 1>Come with the driving, it's well, I mean there's a

0:13:08.960 --> 0:13:12.520
<v Speaker 1>bit of endurance, but it's also very much a I

0:13:12.559 --> 0:13:15.720
<v Speaker 1>think it's a skill thing. Oh waka, I think we

0:13:15.800 --> 0:13:17.920
<v Speaker 1>might raise it in the Formula one report. We do

0:13:18.040 --> 0:13:20.000
<v Speaker 1>that later in the week. That most interesting, But it

0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:22.520
<v Speaker 1>is gentlemen, start your engine or pittance start your engage.

0:13:22.520 --> 0:13:24.880
<v Speaker 2>And there was a lovely that said, a shivered awn

0:13:24.920 --> 0:13:28.000
<v Speaker 2>your spine, didn't a gentleman start your engines? Exit and

0:13:28.000 --> 0:13:30.319
<v Speaker 2>those huge thunderous engines would start.

0:13:30.120 --> 0:13:32.760
<v Speaker 1>Exactly all right, Let's go to Oh, Brian's got a

0:13:32.760 --> 0:13:33.800
<v Speaker 1>beauty here? Hello Brian?

0:13:35.040 --> 0:13:38.920
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, good, evening Collen John Hi hi uh with my

0:13:39.040 --> 0:13:41.920
<v Speaker 6>girlfriend on the weekend and she said jump in Jehosaph.

0:13:42.440 --> 0:13:44.880
<v Speaker 6>Brief conversation, we don't know who Jehosaphat is and what

0:13:45.000 --> 0:13:45.720
<v Speaker 6>he was jumping.

0:13:45.960 --> 0:13:50.559
<v Speaker 2>Okay, it's it's what's called a softened blasphemy. People were

0:13:50.600 --> 0:13:54.920
<v Speaker 2>saying expressions like that in order to avoid using the

0:13:55.000 --> 0:13:58.959
<v Speaker 2>names of God or Jesus in blasphemous expressions. Jehosaphat was

0:13:59.000 --> 0:14:01.160
<v Speaker 2>a prophet in the old test to it. I think

0:14:01.200 --> 0:14:03.560
<v Speaker 2>the jumping part was simply added as a kind of

0:14:03.559 --> 0:14:06.880
<v Speaker 2>alliterative thing jj, nothing more than that, and it was

0:14:06.920 --> 0:14:11.520
<v Speaker 2>invented in order to express surprise and without blaspheming, so

0:14:11.559 --> 0:14:13.880
<v Speaker 2>that when it comes from the eighteen hundreds.

0:14:13.600 --> 0:14:14.680
<v Speaker 1>There's so many of those.

0:14:15.120 --> 0:14:17.000
<v Speaker 2>Well, the world is full of them because we went

0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:20.960
<v Speaker 2>through a period when, particularly the Victorian news, when people

0:14:20.960 --> 0:14:24.600
<v Speaker 2>were very sensitive about blasphemy, and they kept inventing all

0:14:24.680 --> 0:14:26.040
<v Speaker 2>kinds of things.

0:14:25.880 --> 0:14:29.880
<v Speaker 1>Right, very good jumping Jehosaph. Fact, yeah, it was, because

0:14:30.200 --> 0:14:33.160
<v Speaker 1>that's not like the It was the cartoon where you had,

0:14:34.320 --> 0:14:37.720
<v Speaker 1>oh there's one where there was an expression and now

0:14:37.720 --> 0:14:39.400
<v Speaker 1>it's gone out of my head. It might have been

0:14:39.560 --> 0:14:42.400
<v Speaker 1>Foggorn leghorn or someone used to say something like that.

0:14:42.440 --> 0:14:44.760
<v Speaker 1>But jump in Jehoseph and I'll try and remember what

0:14:44.800 --> 0:14:47.160
<v Speaker 1>it was. I've got a few on the text line

0:14:47.200 --> 0:14:51.560
<v Speaker 1>here book Toney's talking about Peter Landy's saying rugby league

0:14:51.600 --> 0:14:55.440
<v Speaker 1>is rugby league, which is probably just the way he speaks,

0:14:55.440 --> 0:14:58.920
<v Speaker 1>but it's actually now become endearing. People actually now referred

0:14:58.880 --> 0:15:01.360
<v Speaker 1>to it as rugby league. That's the way he says

0:15:01.560 --> 0:15:01.960
<v Speaker 1>the league.

0:15:02.040 --> 0:15:07.520
<v Speaker 2>Yes, I remember Neville Ran turned the word police into

0:15:07.560 --> 0:15:11.080
<v Speaker 2>a one syllable word. It was always please, please, please please.

0:15:11.880 --> 0:15:14.280
<v Speaker 1>Now the saying I like the cut of his jib.

0:15:14.960 --> 0:15:17.000
<v Speaker 1>This is I like the cut of.

0:15:16.960 --> 0:15:19.720
<v Speaker 2>His jib from sailing, from the idea that the jib

0:15:19.760 --> 0:15:22.600
<v Speaker 2>is the front sail on a sailing ship of the triangut,

0:15:22.600 --> 0:15:25.000
<v Speaker 2>a sign right at the front. That's the jib. And

0:15:25.080 --> 0:15:27.440
<v Speaker 2>if you've got a really well rigged ship, then then

0:15:27.520 --> 0:15:29.840
<v Speaker 2>it's really well set up. And you like the cut

0:15:29.840 --> 0:15:30.400
<v Speaker 2>of his jib.

0:15:30.560 --> 0:15:31.720
<v Speaker 1>Ye codswallop.

0:15:32.440 --> 0:15:36.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I've talked about this and looked up lots of things.

0:15:35.680 --> 0:15:40.000
<v Speaker 2>That's there's all kinds of stories about this. There was

0:15:40.040 --> 0:15:42.720
<v Speaker 2>a mister Cod who was one of the earliest bottlers

0:15:42.720 --> 0:15:45.680
<v Speaker 2>of soft drink, and he used to. In fact, he

0:15:45.720 --> 0:15:47.640
<v Speaker 2>was famous because he used to seal them with a

0:15:47.760 --> 0:15:50.880
<v Speaker 2>round glass marble, And so little boys then proceeded to

0:15:52.120 --> 0:15:54.280
<v Speaker 2>break the marble out of the bottle top so they

0:15:54.280 --> 0:15:57.800
<v Speaker 2>could play marbles with them. But it was now it

0:15:57.880 --> 0:16:01.040
<v Speaker 2>wasn't It wasn't an alcoholic drink, so it was regarded

0:16:01.080 --> 0:16:03.360
<v Speaker 2>as not as good. It was wallop, and it was

0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:05.680
<v Speaker 2>made by mister Coyd. It was Cod's wallop. That's the

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:09.440
<v Speaker 2>popular story. The dates don't actually fit. It's a lovely story,

0:16:09.480 --> 0:16:11.600
<v Speaker 2>and I wish it was true, but it appears not

0:16:11.680 --> 0:16:17.040
<v Speaker 2>to be true. It's probably just a jocular nonsense invention

0:16:17.440 --> 0:16:21.840
<v Speaker 2>saying this is nonsense, and the stories all came along later.

0:16:22.240 --> 0:16:26.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, kill a brown dog. It would kill a brown dog.

0:16:26.000 --> 0:16:29.240
<v Speaker 2>Or something that's really bad. A bad smell, a bad taste,

0:16:29.560 --> 0:16:32.320
<v Speaker 2>bad enough to kill a brown dog. Why a brown dog,

0:16:32.360 --> 0:16:34.880
<v Speaker 2>I don't know. Why black or white dogs would be

0:16:34.920 --> 0:16:38.680
<v Speaker 2>immune is beyond me. I really, I really can't cast

0:16:38.720 --> 0:16:39.680
<v Speaker 2>a lot of light on that.

0:16:39.960 --> 0:16:43.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Doug is asking this one about hard liquor. So

0:16:43.800 --> 0:16:46.760
<v Speaker 1>we talk about hard liquor. We understand strong liquor, but

0:16:47.000 --> 0:16:51.200
<v Speaker 1>hard liquor has because that's A, and I'm assuming the

0:16:51.280 --> 0:16:54.800
<v Speaker 1>hard liquor is maybe A. I would assume that's a

0:16:54.840 --> 0:16:57.920
<v Speaker 1>reference to spirits as opposed to wine or beer.

0:16:58.360 --> 0:17:01.000
<v Speaker 2>I think it's simply a reference to alcohol, because soft

0:17:01.080 --> 0:17:04.800
<v Speaker 2>drinks are non alcoholic. Yeah, so once it's got alcohol

0:17:04.840 --> 0:17:08.280
<v Speaker 2>in it's it's hard licor it's a hard drink rather

0:17:08.320 --> 0:17:10.000
<v Speaker 2>than a soft drinks. In other words, it's to do

0:17:10.080 --> 0:17:12.200
<v Speaker 2>with her. It's safe for children and adults.

0:17:12.320 --> 0:17:14.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Yosemite, Sam was the person I was thinking of.

0:17:14.840 --> 0:17:17.080
<v Speaker 1>But I've got what was the refrain that you sementy Sam?

0:17:17.080 --> 0:17:19.640
<v Speaker 1>It wasn't jump and jojosaphats, it was something else, I think,

0:17:19.720 --> 0:17:22.679
<v Speaker 1>So thank you very much for that. Yeah, suffering sacotash.

0:17:22.800 --> 0:17:27.320
<v Speaker 1>Thank you, suffern succotash. That was a great one, which

0:17:27.400 --> 0:17:31.240
<v Speaker 1>was Yosemite Sam. Denise is saying this. She sends a

0:17:31.280 --> 0:17:34.800
<v Speaker 1>text here saying crescendo is a lovely musical word. She

0:17:34.840 --> 0:17:39.600
<v Speaker 1>puts in a couple of I think that's my wife. Hope,

0:17:39.600 --> 0:17:45.200
<v Speaker 1>my wife's not listening. Which is a Is that a crotchet? No? Anyway, Okay.

0:17:45.400 --> 0:17:49.000
<v Speaker 2>Sacotash, by the way, is a dish of corn and

0:17:49.119 --> 0:17:52.560
<v Speaker 2>beans cooked together. The name for it comes from a

0:17:52.640 --> 0:17:58.080
<v Speaker 2>North American Indian word or Native American word known in

0:17:58.119 --> 0:18:02.359
<v Speaker 2>America from the late seventeen and suffering suckertash is just

0:18:02.400 --> 0:18:05.040
<v Speaker 2>one of these illiterative things that makes it sound like fun.

0:18:05.200 --> 0:18:07.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you know, we're going to go down because someone say,

0:18:07.400 --> 0:18:08.639
<v Speaker 1>I think that was snuggle puss?

0:18:08.920 --> 0:18:10.719
<v Speaker 2>Was it a snaggle puss?

0:18:10.840 --> 0:18:13.760
<v Speaker 1>Snaggle puss? And then we've got your seventy said, I'm

0:18:13.760 --> 0:18:15.359
<v Speaker 1>going to try and pull these together in a moment.

0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:19.720
<v Speaker 1>So because there was snagglepuss, wasn't that snaggle puss?

0:18:19.760 --> 0:18:23.160
<v Speaker 2>Exit stage right, stage left, even Yeah, exactly.

0:18:22.720 --> 0:18:24.880
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's take a break, come back in the moment.

0:18:24.880 --> 0:18:27.160
<v Speaker 1>We've got more to do here and plenty of questions

0:18:27.160 --> 0:18:28.960
<v Speaker 1>that have come in during the week. We're talking words

0:18:28.960 --> 0:18:31.560
<v Speaker 1>and language here with Kel Richards at twenty three minutes

0:18:31.600 --> 0:18:35.639
<v Speaker 1>to eleven. Yes, Christunda means so, it means gradually louder.

0:18:35.640 --> 0:18:37.679
<v Speaker 1>A few people have said that I played the viola

0:18:37.720 --> 0:18:40.920
<v Speaker 1>many years ago and that would be beautiful to play.

0:18:40.960 --> 0:18:44.480
<v Speaker 1>To get hold of that. Also, Sylvester the Cat. Quite

0:18:44.480 --> 0:18:46.960
<v Speaker 1>a few people are saying thank you on the text

0:18:47.000 --> 0:18:51.640
<v Speaker 1>line and also on email. Suffering suck atash was said

0:18:51.680 --> 0:18:56.120
<v Speaker 1>by Sylvester the cat and Snagglepus was heavens to Murgatroyd.

0:18:56.640 --> 0:18:58.800
<v Speaker 1>Steve's on the line, is that what you're saying to us?

0:18:58.800 --> 0:19:06.600
<v Speaker 4>Steve, Yeah, I believe that suffering sacotash was what they

0:19:06.640 --> 0:19:13.320
<v Speaker 4>call a minced metaphor, so instead of blaspheeming was a

0:19:13.440 --> 0:19:16.040
<v Speaker 4>metophour for suffering Jesus.

0:19:17.200 --> 0:19:20.000
<v Speaker 1>So it's in that basket we've talked about kill all

0:19:20.040 --> 0:19:23.320
<v Speaker 1>those expressions where they're they're sort of substituting words.

0:19:23.600 --> 0:19:26.080
<v Speaker 2>It's a bit hard to know. One of the reasons

0:19:26.160 --> 0:19:28.560
<v Speaker 2>is that there's a number of these expressions, and I

0:19:28.560 --> 0:19:31.080
<v Speaker 2>think heavens to Murgatroyd would be one of them that

0:19:31.160 --> 0:19:36.200
<v Speaker 2>were actually invented by Hollywood writers of cartoons sitting around

0:19:36.240 --> 0:19:38.880
<v Speaker 2>a table and saying we need we need a saying

0:19:38.920 --> 0:19:40.280
<v Speaker 2>for this bloke to come up with. What's he going

0:19:40.359 --> 0:19:43.320
<v Speaker 2>to say? This guy, this guy's got to have something

0:19:43.320 --> 0:19:45.719
<v Speaker 2>to say, what are we and tossing ideas around them

0:19:45.800 --> 0:19:47.639
<v Speaker 2>coming up with phrases. So a whole lot of the

0:19:47.640 --> 0:19:51.160
<v Speaker 2>phrases can only be traced back to their cartoon characters.

0:19:51.400 --> 0:19:54.560
<v Speaker 2>So they were actually coined in the first place by

0:19:54.600 --> 0:19:57.600
<v Speaker 2>the writers of those cartoons. They came out of you know,

0:19:58.280 --> 0:20:00.960
<v Speaker 2>I don't no longer boozy something.

0:20:01.040 --> 0:20:03.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it'd be lots of fun all. Thank you, Steve.

0:20:03.080 --> 0:20:06.080
<v Speaker 1>That's really interesting because and we've got off the usual

0:20:06.080 --> 0:20:08.879
<v Speaker 1>tangent we go on. Here we've got someone saying this

0:20:09.000 --> 0:20:11.360
<v Speaker 1>is Colin not quite the same as yes, Sandriti Sam.

0:20:11.400 --> 0:20:14.080
<v Speaker 1>But Captain Haddock, the sea captain friend of Tin Tin

0:20:14.240 --> 0:20:19.600
<v Speaker 1>used to say thundering typhoons and blistering barnacles whenever he

0:20:19.680 --> 0:20:20.560
<v Speaker 1>was annoyed about.

0:20:20.359 --> 0:20:23.080
<v Speaker 2>Something, and if it got really bad, it was thousands

0:20:23.119 --> 0:20:24.399
<v Speaker 2>of thundering typhoons.

0:20:24.440 --> 0:20:28.440
<v Speaker 1>I think, yes, yeah, and look this is uh is Algernon.

0:20:28.560 --> 0:20:30.359
<v Speaker 1>I think your fine sylvest of the cat. Yeah, and

0:20:30.400 --> 0:20:33.919
<v Speaker 1>you're seventy sound you varmint And galute. Galute is a

0:20:33.960 --> 0:20:35.440
<v Speaker 1>great word, isn't it? Galute?

0:20:35.560 --> 0:20:37.840
<v Speaker 2>Yes, and I think it's a real word. I'm just

0:20:38.040 --> 0:20:40.480
<v Speaker 2>very quickly flicking at an awkward or uncouth fellow. Is

0:20:40.520 --> 0:20:42.840
<v Speaker 2>a goalute. It goes back to eighty o eight and

0:20:42.920 --> 0:20:45.480
<v Speaker 2>they and the Oxford says its origin is unknown, but

0:20:45.560 --> 0:20:48.320
<v Speaker 2>they suspect it started in the navy, the British Navy.

0:20:48.440 --> 0:20:51.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Snaggle puts heavens to Murgatroyd. So I guess that.

0:20:51.480 --> 0:20:53.879
<v Speaker 2>That's again we're talking mate, all that stuff.

0:20:54.000 --> 0:20:59.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Thomas just checked here. Hard liquor consensus is it's

0:20:59.200 --> 0:21:02.880
<v Speaker 1>distilled spirit like vodka, Jim Run whiskey and tequila which

0:21:02.920 --> 0:21:06.360
<v Speaker 1>got a high alcohol contrayt soft liquors of beer and wine.

0:21:06.480 --> 0:21:07.680
<v Speaker 1>So that makes sense.

0:21:07.760 --> 0:21:09.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that would make sense. That would make sense.

0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:16.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, all right, Oh what he's saying here, he got here,

0:21:19.840 --> 0:21:21.720
<v Speaker 1>very very good. Someone's just sending me a note about

0:21:21.760 --> 0:21:25.159
<v Speaker 1>the his battle, like in knocking up the Powerball numbers tonight.

0:21:25.200 --> 0:21:27.720
<v Speaker 1>I think in the end, well, it's a hundred million

0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:29.800
<v Speaker 1>dollars next Thursday, so you have another crack in the

0:21:29.760 --> 0:21:33.640
<v Speaker 1>then Gen's called in with one, which well, let's throw

0:21:33.640 --> 0:21:34.560
<v Speaker 1>it up to the jury.

0:21:34.600 --> 0:21:42.200
<v Speaker 5>Hello, Jen, Hi John high cow By my word, I

0:21:42.359 --> 0:21:45.920
<v Speaker 5>used to say fuck in the eighties.

0:21:47.280 --> 0:21:51.240
<v Speaker 1>A cocoa, yep iffing a cocoa.

0:21:52.160 --> 0:21:55.320
<v Speaker 2>Never heard it, never ever heard it? In what context?

0:21:55.359 --> 0:21:57.520
<v Speaker 2>What did she what was? Did she mean it to mean?

0:22:00.359 --> 0:22:00.439
<v Speaker 4>What?

0:22:00.600 --> 0:22:01.320
<v Speaker 6>I don't.

0:22:02.720 --> 0:22:05.120
<v Speaker 1>Was she was? She was she editing the effing bit

0:22:05.280 --> 0:22:08.359
<v Speaker 1>for meaning something else? Do you think maybe.

0:22:09.800 --> 0:22:09.879
<v Speaker 4>So?

0:22:10.040 --> 0:22:12.320
<v Speaker 2>Was she saying it which she was angry or irritated?

0:22:12.400 --> 0:22:15.600
<v Speaker 2>Or was it meant to be flippant, she was angry, irritated.

0:22:16.200 --> 0:22:20.000
<v Speaker 1>Okay, that might be one that they've just invented themselves.

0:22:20.000 --> 0:22:21.800
<v Speaker 2>And there are a number of sayings. When I did

0:22:21.840 --> 0:22:27.600
<v Speaker 2>that research for language around Australia regional dialects, a lot

0:22:27.640 --> 0:22:31.000
<v Speaker 2>of sayings are just family sayings and they're just cooked

0:22:31.040 --> 0:22:33.159
<v Speaker 2>up in the family. Everyone in the family knows them

0:22:33.200 --> 0:22:35.840
<v Speaker 2>and everyone in the family says them, but outside the

0:22:35.840 --> 0:22:38.600
<v Speaker 2>family they're completely unknown. This may well be one of

0:22:38.640 --> 0:22:40.080
<v Speaker 2>those most interesting.

0:22:40.080 --> 0:22:41.760
<v Speaker 1>All right, look, thank you, but if anyone knows, if

0:22:41.760 --> 0:22:44.320
<v Speaker 1>anyone's heard it, otherwise it would be likely to be

0:22:44.400 --> 0:22:46.440
<v Speaker 1>something as you say, just within.

0:22:46.800 --> 0:22:48.960
<v Speaker 2>I did a book called word Map which I did

0:22:49.000 --> 0:22:51.440
<v Speaker 2>with the together with the Macaura Dictionary, which which picks

0:22:51.520 --> 0:22:53.600
<v Speaker 2>up a whole lot of these things about it around Australia,

0:22:53.680 --> 0:22:56.560
<v Speaker 2>and we had people nominate things on a website and

0:22:56.640 --> 0:23:00.320
<v Speaker 2>a lot of people nominated really interesting expressions else ever

0:23:00.359 --> 0:23:02.800
<v Speaker 2>heard of because they were family express.

0:23:02.560 --> 0:23:06.320
<v Speaker 1>Within their own family. Yes, really really interesting. Galuse I

0:23:06.440 --> 0:23:10.800
<v Speaker 1>love that word galute jumping Stanley, someone's saying so very good.

0:23:11.000 --> 0:23:11.560
<v Speaker 2>Never heard that?

0:23:11.800 --> 0:23:14.040
<v Speaker 1>No, never very good. Please don't do that to me.

0:23:14.440 --> 0:23:17.640
<v Speaker 1>Now there's a couple that we've got as homework or

0:23:17.720 --> 0:23:21.160
<v Speaker 1>emails that have come in. One of them is people

0:23:21.200 --> 0:23:24.960
<v Speaker 1>talk about someone colliding with a tree, and I thought

0:23:25.040 --> 0:23:29.280
<v Speaker 1>collide meant that both subjects had to be moving and

0:23:29.359 --> 0:23:33.159
<v Speaker 1>people are always scrambling to rescue survivors. So this is

0:23:33.560 --> 0:23:35.280
<v Speaker 1>just a couple of different ones there. So what do

0:23:35.280 --> 0:23:35.840
<v Speaker 1>you make of those?

0:23:35.880 --> 0:23:39.359
<v Speaker 2>Okay, their complaints about what journalists do. The one about

0:23:39.400 --> 0:23:42.359
<v Speaker 2>you can't use collide unless both objects are moving is

0:23:42.400 --> 0:23:45.360
<v Speaker 2>one of the great myths of journalists. On every young

0:23:45.400 --> 0:23:48.400
<v Speaker 2>journalist comes in and if it writes a story about

0:23:48.400 --> 0:23:51.120
<v Speaker 2>a car colliding with a tree, and some smart old

0:23:51.160 --> 0:23:54.720
<v Speaker 2>journalists so a sun sogn the word is allied. Collide

0:23:54.720 --> 0:23:58.639
<v Speaker 2>only means when both objects are moving. Now there's a

0:23:58.680 --> 0:24:01.480
<v Speaker 2>grain of truth in it. When they started it applied

0:24:01.520 --> 0:24:04.200
<v Speaker 2>to maritime law and ships at sea, if two ships

0:24:04.200 --> 0:24:07.040
<v Speaker 2>were in motion and hit one another, they collided, and

0:24:07.080 --> 0:24:08.800
<v Speaker 2>if one of them was in motion and not the other,

0:24:08.960 --> 0:24:12.560
<v Speaker 2>they alided. But in fact, in common English that passed

0:24:12.560 --> 0:24:17.680
<v Speaker 2>away centuries ago, and colliding can be applied to any impact.

0:24:17.960 --> 0:24:20.600
<v Speaker 2>So when that smart ole journalist in the newsroom says,

0:24:20.720 --> 0:24:23.720
<v Speaker 2>you can't say collide because the tree wasn't moving, telling

0:24:23.760 --> 0:24:27.159
<v Speaker 2>him is wrong you can. It's perfectly okay. The other

0:24:27.240 --> 0:24:29.480
<v Speaker 2>one he was talking about was scrambling. He complained about

0:24:30.320 --> 0:24:34.320
<v Speaker 2>after an earthquake or a natural disaster, there are rescue

0:24:34.320 --> 0:24:38.840
<v Speaker 2>workers scrambling to find survivors. The word scramble literally means

0:24:38.880 --> 0:24:43.000
<v Speaker 2>to move hastily and in disorder. Now, I think it's

0:24:43.040 --> 0:24:48.440
<v Speaker 2>a pointless journalistic cruiser, a cliche, because eggs can be scrambled,

0:24:48.520 --> 0:24:52.639
<v Speaker 2>not rescues. Rescues are often really well organized, very systematic,

0:24:52.880 --> 0:24:55.040
<v Speaker 2>and so the one thing they're not is a scramble.

0:24:55.960 --> 0:25:02.800
<v Speaker 1>Very good. Now, for Notre Dame Notre Dame.

0:25:03.720 --> 0:25:09.840
<v Speaker 2>So okay, it's Notre Dame in France, and most English

0:25:09.920 --> 0:25:11.240
<v Speaker 2>speakers would say Notre Dame.

0:25:11.320 --> 0:25:14.240
<v Speaker 1>The Americans say no to day they say Notre Dame.

0:25:14.480 --> 0:25:15.880
<v Speaker 2>Yes, and we say Notre Dame.

0:25:16.520 --> 0:25:19.040
<v Speaker 1>Because they've got their very famous college, haven't they.

0:25:19.240 --> 0:25:24.280
<v Speaker 2>They've got Notre Dame, Notre Dame University, which is one

0:25:24.280 --> 0:25:27.720
<v Speaker 2>of the great universities in America. So, and it's theirs.

0:25:27.760 --> 0:25:30.320
<v Speaker 2>They can pronounce it anyhow any way they want. It's

0:25:30.400 --> 0:25:31.920
<v Speaker 2>just that they're wrong. They're Americans.

0:25:33.520 --> 0:25:35.520
<v Speaker 1>It's their college and then university I can call it.

0:25:35.640 --> 0:25:37.359
<v Speaker 1>They can describe it the way they want to, can't they?

0:25:37.400 --> 0:25:38.720
<v Speaker 1>Or you're going to turn up at their.

0:25:40.840 --> 0:25:44.720
<v Speaker 2>And correct them all? Not not when their football teams

0:25:44.760 --> 0:25:45.560
<v Speaker 2>just want a big match.

0:25:45.600 --> 0:25:48.200
<v Speaker 1>Now, all right, so look, I think we've we've got

0:25:48.800 --> 0:25:51.000
<v Speaker 1>we've got three and a half years left. I think

0:25:51.000 --> 0:25:55.920
<v Speaker 1>we're going to raise a collection of basically a couple

0:25:55.960 --> 0:26:00.160
<v Speaker 1>of months accommodation. If is you can look after him,

0:26:00.400 --> 0:26:03.399
<v Speaker 1>get in the accreditation. I want you to be in

0:26:03.440 --> 0:26:07.639
<v Speaker 1>that White House press room and start correcting Donald Trump. No, no,

0:26:08.119 --> 0:26:12.760
<v Speaker 1>mister president, kel Richards from Kel Richards from the Channel

0:26:12.800 --> 0:26:17.280
<v Speaker 1>nine radio network. You're actually pronouncing that I've got a

0:26:17.280 --> 0:26:19.760
<v Speaker 1>problem with the policy, but you're not saying it correctly.

0:26:19.800 --> 0:26:22.359
<v Speaker 1>Can I just explain? I'd love that to have.

0:26:23.359 --> 0:26:26.040
<v Speaker 2>You know how long I'd survived. Donald does not take

0:26:26.080 --> 0:26:27.360
<v Speaker 2>correction well.

0:26:27.040 --> 0:26:30.720
<v Speaker 1>Exactly, So it would be entertaining, though, wouldn't it.

0:26:30.480 --> 0:26:34.080
<v Speaker 2>For about ten seconds after us? For you? It would

0:26:34.200 --> 0:26:35.000
<v Speaker 2>be not for me?

0:26:35.200 --> 0:26:37.280
<v Speaker 1>Okay, all right, Well I can think about it. Neil

0:26:37.840 --> 0:26:41.439
<v Speaker 1>twelve to eleven. Now there's just three that I don't have.

0:26:41.520 --> 0:26:47.280
<v Speaker 1>They're linked hoon goon and hooliganism. So I don't know

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:50.400
<v Speaker 1>hoon goon, hooligan, hooliganism.

0:26:50.960 --> 0:26:54.840
<v Speaker 2>The officially they're not too sure where the word hohon

0:26:54.960 --> 0:26:58.240
<v Speaker 2>came from. It's common in Australia, also common in New Zealand,

0:26:58.240 --> 0:27:00.760
<v Speaker 2>but not known outside this country. I made of mine

0:27:00.800 --> 0:27:03.400
<v Speaker 2>was driving an English friend of his around Melbourne once

0:27:03.440 --> 0:27:06.000
<v Speaker 2>and some raced across the front of him in his

0:27:06.000 --> 0:27:08.440
<v Speaker 2>car and my friend said, oh, look at that hoon,

0:27:08.640 --> 0:27:11.200
<v Speaker 2>and the Englishman was totally baffled. I had no idea

0:27:11.240 --> 0:27:13.399
<v Speaker 2>what he was talking about. There have been lots of

0:27:13.440 --> 0:27:17.240
<v Speaker 2>guests guesses is what it as to what it came from.

0:27:17.600 --> 0:27:20.120
<v Speaker 2>Maybe Goon was the start of it. That's a possibility.

0:27:20.400 --> 0:27:23.400
<v Speaker 2>But one of the other suggestions is it comes from

0:27:23.520 --> 0:27:29.240
<v Speaker 2>the creatures in Galliva's travels called the Winhams spelt hou,

0:27:29.720 --> 0:27:35.000
<v Speaker 2>so the idea that the Winhems, but the Winhams are

0:27:35.080 --> 0:27:38.119
<v Speaker 2>very good characters in Gallova's travel so that seems unlikely.

0:27:39.040 --> 0:27:43.240
<v Speaker 2>The goon story goes back to only to the nineteen twenties.

0:27:45.119 --> 0:27:48.119
<v Speaker 2>There's no real clarity as to where it came from.

0:27:48.359 --> 0:27:51.000
<v Speaker 2>The suggestion that the Oxford people came up with is

0:27:51.080 --> 0:27:53.959
<v Speaker 2>they think it might have started off with being someone's

0:27:53.960 --> 0:27:59.400
<v Speaker 2>surname and it was picked and it was used. There

0:27:59.400 --> 0:28:04.720
<v Speaker 2>was an America a cartoonist who drew a cartoon called

0:28:04.760 --> 0:28:08.359
<v Speaker 2>Alice Dagoon, which was popular for a long time, and

0:28:08.440 --> 0:28:12.440
<v Speaker 2>she was fairly dumb apparently, so that that probably put

0:28:12.480 --> 0:28:15.320
<v Speaker 2>it into circulation. But the actual source of the that

0:28:15.840 --> 0:28:17.800
<v Speaker 2>gw N name is really unclear.

0:28:17.880 --> 0:28:21.280
<v Speaker 1>All right, very interesting, and look, I've got where is it?

0:28:22.240 --> 0:28:25.400
<v Speaker 1>I mentioned galute one of our texts, just saying Ray

0:28:25.520 --> 0:28:27.359
<v Speaker 1>used to use it. Ray Hadley called Don haw And

0:28:27.400 --> 0:28:29.320
<v Speaker 1>a galute one of his rants, and he's look he

0:28:29.400 --> 0:28:33.080
<v Speaker 1>actually well, my former colleague James Willis were playing at

0:28:33.080 --> 0:28:35.719
<v Speaker 1>Massy Park one day and someone took a photo and

0:28:36.520 --> 0:28:38.920
<v Speaker 1>sent it to the Great Man and we were described

0:28:38.920 --> 0:28:42.360
<v Speaker 1>as a pair of galutes because we were I think

0:28:42.360 --> 0:28:44.400
<v Speaker 1>we were struggling that day and someone sent him a

0:28:44.920 --> 0:28:47.080
<v Speaker 1>send him a scorecard. So anyway, so that is a

0:28:47.120 --> 0:28:50.720
<v Speaker 1>great expression galute. I guess not that offensive, is it? Galte?

0:28:50.840 --> 0:28:53.080
<v Speaker 2>No? No, no, it wouldn't be actionable. I mean it

0:28:53.240 --> 0:28:55.960
<v Speaker 2>started off as navy slang. It's not dreadful.

0:28:56.000 --> 0:29:01.320
<v Speaker 1>All right, Debra, you've got one for us, have your yes.

0:29:01.760 --> 0:29:02.040
<v Speaker 6>Yes.

0:29:03.360 --> 0:29:05.560
<v Speaker 8>My sister and I were talking today. I rang about

0:29:05.600 --> 0:29:09.400
<v Speaker 8>a year or so ago about we were laughing about something.

0:29:09.440 --> 0:29:11.800
<v Speaker 8>My mum used to say when we worked up for

0:29:11.880 --> 0:29:13.160
<v Speaker 8>crying out for sink.

0:29:14.120 --> 0:29:15.680
<v Speaker 1>For crying down the seat.

0:29:15.680 --> 0:29:20.720
<v Speaker 8>Or I actually got the answer to what that actually means.

0:29:21.000 --> 0:29:22.360
<v Speaker 2>Say the expression again.

0:29:23.360 --> 0:29:25.960
<v Speaker 1>For crying out for seak, for crying down the seat.

0:29:26.000 --> 0:29:28.040
<v Speaker 1>You know you talk about it for crying out loud.

0:29:28.200 --> 0:29:30.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so it's obviously a variation on crying out.

0:29:30.600 --> 0:29:34.000
<v Speaker 8>Loud whenever we barked up for crying out for sink.

0:29:36.800 --> 0:29:39.480
<v Speaker 2>Obviously, it seems to me she was intending to shed

0:29:39.640 --> 0:29:42.880
<v Speaker 2>a huge number of tears and needed an open plughole

0:29:42.920 --> 0:29:46.080
<v Speaker 2>to cry over. But it's not an expression I have

0:29:46.160 --> 0:29:48.520
<v Speaker 2>ever heard before. I'm going to write it down and

0:29:48.520 --> 0:29:51.160
<v Speaker 2>see if I can do a bit of research on

0:29:51.160 --> 0:29:51.360
<v Speaker 2>that one.

0:29:51.440 --> 0:29:53.680
<v Speaker 1>For this it's a possible, Deborah. It's one of those

0:29:53.720 --> 0:29:56.720
<v Speaker 1>ones where your mum kind of adapted it for her

0:29:56.720 --> 0:29:59.000
<v Speaker 1>own use for your family.

0:30:00.280 --> 0:30:03.720
<v Speaker 3>Oh no, she said it was an English then, right, Okay.

0:30:03.520 --> 0:30:05.560
<v Speaker 2>Anyway, I've written it down in the notebook. I'll do

0:30:05.600 --> 0:30:06.240
<v Speaker 2>a bit of digging.

0:30:06.440 --> 0:30:08.960
<v Speaker 1>Okay, very good, There you go. We'll find out what

0:30:09.000 --> 0:30:10.840
<v Speaker 1>the story is in relation to that one, because often

0:30:10.880 --> 0:30:13.360
<v Speaker 1>and we often get feedback from other people who have

0:30:13.680 --> 0:30:15.440
<v Speaker 1>actually used it themselves.

0:30:15.480 --> 0:30:17.680
<v Speaker 2>The best research team we have for your listeners.

0:30:17.840 --> 0:30:20.080
<v Speaker 1>Okay, all right, Debora, Kel's going to have a look

0:30:20.080 --> 0:30:22.360
<v Speaker 1>at that one and see if you can find anything.

0:30:22.560 --> 0:30:25.560
<v Speaker 1>We were mentioning terms that what Ray used to use,

0:30:25.640 --> 0:30:27.960
<v Speaker 1>continuous call tom. This is one Daryl's raised and I

0:30:28.040 --> 0:30:32.000
<v Speaker 1>know they did it brew haha, which is brew haha.

0:30:32.040 --> 0:30:35.920
<v Speaker 2>It's great word, yeah, better around since eighteen ninety comes

0:30:35.960 --> 0:30:39.200
<v Speaker 2>from an exactly similar French word, which was written and

0:30:39.400 --> 0:30:42.800
<v Speaker 2>sounded the same. And the French word means commotion. Some

0:30:42.880 --> 0:30:46.280
<v Speaker 2>experts say it started in the French medieval theater, when

0:30:46.320 --> 0:30:48.840
<v Speaker 2>it was used as a cry uttered by the devil

0:30:49.040 --> 0:30:52.240
<v Speaker 2>when he leapt onto the stage, threatening to bring commotion

0:30:52.360 --> 0:30:54.840
<v Speaker 2>to the scene. Now, if that's correct, it was probably

0:30:54.880 --> 0:30:58.480
<v Speaker 2>an invented word, coined by an actor or a playwright

0:30:58.840 --> 0:31:02.760
<v Speaker 2>to sound threatening or something like that. But from the French.

0:31:03.000 --> 0:31:05.600
<v Speaker 2>In English and still with us, all.

0:31:05.560 --> 0:31:07.440
<v Speaker 1>Right, look, there's a pile of things here. I just

0:31:07.440 --> 0:31:09.560
<v Speaker 1>want to touch on a couple. This is no brainer,

0:31:09.600 --> 0:31:12.320
<v Speaker 1>which we often use where you say okay, it's a

0:31:12.400 --> 0:31:17.560
<v Speaker 1>no brainer, so as in this is something should know

0:31:17.640 --> 0:31:18.400
<v Speaker 1>that answered that one.

0:31:18.520 --> 0:31:20.560
<v Speaker 2>The listener who wrote to us Martin was concerned that

0:31:20.600 --> 0:31:22.880
<v Speaker 2>it was an offensive expression. We're saying there are some

0:31:22.920 --> 0:31:25.720
<v Speaker 2>people with no brains, and he mentioned in bracket someone

0:31:25.720 --> 0:31:27.600
<v Speaker 2>by the name of Joe Biden, whoever that may be.

0:31:28.600 --> 0:31:31.840
<v Speaker 2>And I can reassure Martin it's not an offensive expression

0:31:31.840 --> 0:31:35.160
<v Speaker 2>because it's not about people. It's about ideas. It's not

0:31:35.240 --> 0:31:37.640
<v Speaker 2>people that are no brainers. It's ideas that are no brainer.

0:31:37.720 --> 0:31:40.480
<v Speaker 2>So it just means something very obvious coined in America

0:31:41.440 --> 0:31:44.120
<v Speaker 2>not all that long ago, nineteen fifties, to say this

0:31:44.200 --> 0:31:46.520
<v Speaker 2>is so obvious it stands out you don't need to

0:31:46.560 --> 0:31:49.600
<v Speaker 2>engage the brain to understand it. So Martin relaxed. It

0:31:49.640 --> 0:31:50.280
<v Speaker 2>is not offensive.

0:31:50.320 --> 0:31:52.760
<v Speaker 1>It's one of my former colleagues here used to describe

0:31:52.800 --> 0:31:56.480
<v Speaker 1>people as brain dead, which I think is a pejorative term,

0:31:56.520 --> 0:31:58.960
<v Speaker 1>and I think it's pretty He's basically saying the blakes,

0:31:59.040 --> 0:32:02.480
<v Speaker 1>yeah stupid or the person stupid. So anyway, we won't

0:32:02.480 --> 0:32:06.960
<v Speaker 1>go to that one anymore. And look, abstropolis, abstropolis. That's

0:32:07.000 --> 0:32:10.000
<v Speaker 1>a lovely word, abstropolis. And I've only got maybe can

0:32:10.040 --> 0:32:12.080
<v Speaker 1>we save it to next week. I've only got twenty seconds, Like.

0:32:12.000 --> 0:32:13.880
<v Speaker 2>I can do it in twenty seconds. It's older than

0:32:13.880 --> 0:32:16.640
<v Speaker 2>you might think. Recorded seventeen twenty seven, appears to be

0:32:16.680 --> 0:32:20.240
<v Speaker 2>a jocular comic variation of an other word obstreperous, which

0:32:20.280 --> 0:32:22.920
<v Speaker 2>is older, comes from a Latin source word meaning troublesome.

0:32:23.160 --> 0:32:27.120
<v Speaker 2>The Oxford says obstropolis originally meant having an obstreperous mouth.

0:32:27.840 --> 0:32:28.880
<v Speaker 2>So there you are.

0:32:28.880 --> 0:32:30.120
<v Speaker 1>There you go, all right, Kel will do it again

0:32:30.120 --> 0:32:30.720
<v Speaker 1>next week. Thank you.

0:32:30.880 --> 0:32:31.400
<v Speaker 2>Talk to you there,