38
   

"So, in answer to your question..."

 
 
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 Jun, 2012 07:57 am
i always say, so, a needle pulling thread
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Jun, 2012 10:07 am
@djjd62,
Wrong 'so', djjd.
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 Jun, 2012 11:17 am
@JTT,
not according to the song
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Jun, 2012 11:24 am
@djjd62,
Quote:
not according to the song


Are you suggesting that the song has more in the way of cognitive senses than you, djjd?
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Jun, 2012 09:16 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
My point was that I believe it could very well reflect the English that Jewish New Yorkers spoke in the first half of the 20th century when many still spoke with a sing-song Yiddish accent.

I very much doubt that. First, it's not typical of Yiddish to start answers with "so." It wouldn't even be something borrowed into Yiddish from German. I understand Calamity Jane's point about "so" in German, but Germans use "so" in pretty much the same way that the word is used in English, and they don't start answers with "so" either. Second, if it were typical of Yiddish, it would have appeared in English long before the past decade or so -- a time when Yiddish speakers are all but extinct.

The only plausible theory that I've seen in this thread is the article that JTT posted, and even that one leaves me somewhat skeptical.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 09:52 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

Foofie wrote:
My point was that I believe it could very well reflect the English that Jewish New Yorkers spoke in the first half of the 20th century when many still spoke with a sing-song Yiddish accent.

I very much doubt that. First, it's not typical of Yiddish to start answers with "so." It wouldn't even be something borrowed into Yiddish from German. I understand Calamity Jane's point about "so" in German, but Germans use "so" in pretty much the same way that the word is used in English, and they don't start answers with "so" either. Second, if it were typical of Yiddish, it would have appeared in English long before the past decade or so -- a time when Yiddish speakers are all but extinct.

The only plausible theory that I've seen in this thread is the article that JTT posted, and even that one leaves me somewhat skeptical.


O.K. English, spoken by early 20th century New Yorkers, whose parents usually spoke Yiddish, might have only began "questions" with "so," not "answers." But, assuming that idiosyncracy had no value to the language, other than a holdover from perhaps Yiddish (?), then what value does the present use of "so" have for Americans, using it to start an "answer"?

Perhaps, "so" represents a subtle connontation of "it's not such an important point I'm about to offer"? Sort of an implied modesty/humility in one's answer? "So," what else could it connote?

Do Valley Girls use "so"?
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 09:56 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
not according to the song


Are you suggesting that the song has more in the way of cognitive senses than you, djjd?


definitely
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 10:17 am
@Foofie,
You're a fuckin' idiot, and that's because you're a racist bigot. According to the North American Jewish Data bank, there were about 600,000 Jews in New York in 1900. Among the other three millions of the population, the parents spoke Yiddish? Only the Jews matter in your sick, twisted, racist little world.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 10:26 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

You're a fuckin' idiot, and that's because you're a racist bigot. According to the North American Jewish Data bank, there were about 600,000 Jews in New York in 1900. Among the other three millions of the population, the parents spoke Yiddish? Only the Jews matter in your sick, twisted, racist little world.


I was referring to those whose parents spoke Yiddish. That would not include the Irish or most Italians (some Italians did learn Yiddish, based on their propinquity in the Lower East Side).

Why do you assume that I only think "Jews matter"? That is a false accusation. I think WASPs matter. Italian-Americians matter. African-Americans matter. Hispanics matter. If I left out your own demographic, don't accuse me of racism. You might want to accuse me of being discriminating in my preferences. You being from the Bronx originally are likely aware of which demographics maintained a separate existence in NYC. But, don't correlate that to racism. Americans can be discriminating in their choice of socializing; it is a civil right.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 10:31 am
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
O.K. English, spoken by early 20th century New Yorkers, whose parents usually spoke Yiddish, might have only began "questions" with "so," not "answers."


This is what you wrote, Einstein, and it's glaringly obvious that to you, only the Jews matter. In 1900, Jews were less than 20% of the population of New York, and yet you write as though there were no other people in New York than Jews. That's because you can't get your head out of your bigot's ass.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 10:55 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Foofie wrote:
O.K. English, spoken by early 20th century New Yorkers, whose parents usually spoke Yiddish, might have only began "questions" with "so," not "answers."


This is what you wrote, Einstein, and it's glaringly obvious that to you, only the Jews matter. In 1900, Jews were less than 20% of the population of New York, and yet you write as though there were no other people in New York than Jews. That's because you can't get your head out of your bigot's ass.


The lingering effect of Jews in New York really was disproportionate to their numbers; however, in the 1950's one out of four New Yorkers were Jewish, and one out of three New Yorkers were Irish or of Irish descent.

Even today, public schools close on the main Jewish holiday in September (Rosh Hashonah and Yom Kippur). People do know that much of Manhattan real estate reflects Jewish realtors. The reality is that Jews in New York may have left the city proper to live, but their economic impact still remains.

Now, let's compare that to the Irish. They were not entrepreneurial in the Jewish or Italian manner. A majority were happy to have a steady income, especially a civil service job, as I have been told by Irish New Yorkers. So, when they left en masse in the early 1960's, their economic footprint left with them. In my opinion, the Catholic Church still has a voice in New York politics, and that voice might still have a bit of the brogue, if you get my drift.

I am talking sociology, not anything else.

Please don't refer to me as Einstein, since it is more than being fascetious about my intelligence; you are calling me a German Jew. Many Jews of Eastern European descent avoid German Jews. They sometimes have the myopia to think of themselves as German. Other Jews might find that beyond foolish.

By the way, being my age, I have known more than one (aka, "many") New York Irish that "acted" in a manner that only Irish "matter" in NYC. Well, in their day, they did matter, in the sense that they kept the subways, busses, sanitation, sewers, firehouses, all working efficiently. But, being a capitalistic city, when they left, their import went with them, in my opinion.

Have a pleasant day.

P.S. As you might have discerned from other threads, in my opinion, WASPs are the final arbiters as to who matters in the US. If anyone matters at all, it is/has been at their largesse. That is the reality, in my opinion. I am quite comfortable with it. I am not sure other demographics are, since there are demographics in the US that profess a humble faith, but exude a degree of ethnic hubris on occasion. Not I; I am the zenith of humility.
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 12:22 pm
@Foofie,
Racist pig.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 07:05 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
Second, if it were typical of Yiddish, it would have appeared in English long before the past decade or so -- a time when Yiddish speakers are all but extinct.


And it would sound Yiddish, and it would be recognized as being from Yiddish, with the result that it wouldn't have made its way into English in the manner it appears to have.

Quote:
The only plausible theory that I've seen in this thread is the article that JTT posted, and even that one leaves me somewhat skeptical.


What part leaves you skeptical, Joe? I haven't had time to think this over extensively or to go over the posts, but I'm still not sure that anyone has described this new, particular usage of 'so', except for you, and possibly Setanta.

It wasn't around when I left English speaking countries in the late 1980s, or, maybe more accurately, I hadn't come into contact with it. I first noticed it around 2006 - it leapt out at me as "non-English", but it's not widespread in the sense that all speakers seem to use it.

Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 07:07 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Racist pig.


Am I now? And why would that be? Because I choose to exercise my civil right to be discriminating as to who I would give a red lollipop?

How ye sow, so shall ye reap. You know who said that. My avoidance of certain demographics is based on how they sowed in just my lifetime. In my opinion, your kneejerk adhominems gives credence to my need for discriminating judgements. So few people seem to want civil discourse, at least on A2K? Have a pleasant day.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 07:58 pm
@Setanta,
This is the guy who often raises the issue of people off topic. Lord, if only someone had kept track of the myriad ways you have been a hypocrite, Set.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 08:12 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
And it would sound Yiddish, and it would be recognized as being from Yiddish, with the result that it wouldn't have made its way into English in the manner it appears to have.

Good points.

JTT wrote:
What part leaves you skeptical, Joe? I haven't had time to think this over extensively or to go over the posts, but I'm still not sure that anyone has described this new, particular usage of 'so', except for you, and possibly Setanta.

I'm wary of explanations for language innovations that ascribe them to "my friends/my colleagues/my organization." I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong, just that it's easy for someone to go unconsciously from "we always said it that way" to "we were the first to say it that way."
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 08:43 pm
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

JTT wrote:
And it would sound Yiddish, and it would be recognized as being from Yiddish, with the result that it wouldn't have made its way into English in the manner it appears to have.

Good points.



Then please explain the "bagel." Oh right, it is only a New York bread. In effect, the bagel came in under the radar of the popular culture.

My explanation of the bagel's acceptance was it was viewed as a marketable moneymaker, and therefore it was annointed "not Jewish." The same route that Christianity took, in my opinion.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 09:07 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
Then please explain the "bagel." Oh right, it is only a New York bread. In effect, the bagel came in under the radar of the popular culture.


That's not the same thing, Foofie. There are many, many nouns that have entered the English language. 'bagel' entered because English doesn't normally try to reinvent the wheel when it comes to new things. If it's a 'bagel', then it's a bagel.

Structural changes from other languages are much more difficult to get into the language.

Quote:
My explanation of the bagel's acceptance was it was viewed as a marketable moneymaker, and therefore it was annointed "not Jewish."


That's false. My impression, I don't really know or remember how it was formed, was that it came from a Jewish/Yiddish source.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2012 09:14 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
I'm wary of explanations for language innovations that ascribe them to "my friends/my colleagues/my organization." I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong, just that it's easy for someone to go unconsciously from "we always said it that way" to "we were the first to say it that way."


I agree fully, Joe.

How long, ... or maybe better, can you recall when you first encountered it? Was it in direct contact with another person or on a media source? Can you recall your first reaction?
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2012 08:04 am
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
Then please explain the "bagel."

It's a ring of bread dough, first boiled and then baked, and frequently flavored or topped with onion, garlic, poppy seeds, sesame seeds, etc.

Foofie wrote:
Oh right, it is only a New York bread. In effect, the bagel came in under the radar of the popular culture.

I have no clue what you're talking about.
 

Related Topics

There is a word for that! - Discussion by wandeljw
Best Euphemism for death and dying.... - Discussion by tsarstepan
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Help me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Question by lululucy
phrase/name of male seducer - Question by Zah03
Shameful sexist languge must be banned! - Question by neologist
Three Word Phrase I REALLY Hate to See - Discussion by hawkeye10
Is History an art or a science? - Question by Olivier5
"Rooms" in a cave - Question by shua
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 10:29:46