I’m sure that we’ve remarked upon the capriciousness of the English Language before. Considering its rather complex development it’s probably not all that surprising. Mind you, the particular linguistic feature I was thinking about earlier this week is not, I have learned, just confined to English. I refer to the contranym.
Contranyms are those strange words that can be used with two
opposite meanings. Back in the mists of time I had a teacher who wished to
explain the concept to my class – not trying to be disrespectful but he’d have
been a lot better off sticking with noun, verbs and adjectives and giving up
the rest as a bad job with a sizeable minority of the class. Instead he decided to muddy the waters by
using the word ‘cleave’ as an example. I mean, not many of us had ever used the
word in the sense of to cut, let alone the archaic, well, frankly, even
biblical meaning of cleaving unto someone else. The funny thing is that there
are such better examples he could have used – dust – fast – left being just
three that everyone would at least have heard of before.
You know, despite that, I can’t help being glad to have
attended school back in the days when you were sometimes taught useless
knowledge like this. I mean, it’s difficult to think of a context in which not
knowing that such words have this property could have a seriously adverse
effect on your life. Although I can imagine a situation where asking someone to
cleave to you could have potentially disastrous consequences.
I’ll be honest, I do quite like using an archaic word like
cleave from time to time. Let’s take the word placket, shall we? If you’re a
fan of TV shows like the Great British Sewing Bee you’ll probably know that it
is, today, a perfectly innocuous term meaning a type of deliberate slit in a
garment. However, when Shakespeare, for example, used the word in his plays, he
was not trying to give dressmaking tips. No, he was using a term for an
intimate part of one’s anatomy. No names, no pack drill – you can look it up if
you’re that interested. I will state now that I never called a child that I
taught a placket, but it’s a word I would use when I had the odd occasion to do
so. The first time I heard it in that context was in a sketch by Dick Emery.
You hardly ever hear his name mentioned now, but he was a hugely popular TV
comedian in the 1970s, and had a TV sketch show in which he played a range of characters.
He was a product of his time, and derived humour from material that you just
wouldn’t see today – if you know much about Britain in the 70s it won’t
surprise you that he regularly used racist and homophobic material, as did the
majority of ‘family’ entertainers of that time.
In the sketch in question Dick Emery was playing one of his
stock characters, an aging vicar with prominent buck teeth. In the sketch his
daughter had brought her new boyfriend home to meet Daddy. The point of the
sketch was that the vicar had a huge aversion to any word or phrase that could
have a slightly risque meaning. OK, quite funny. But he twist in the sketch was
that the words the reverend had taught his daughter to use in their place were
all archaic terms that were far, far ruder than the modern words they
avoided. Hence, instead of offering the boyfriend
a mince tart, he offered him a mince placket. The vicar becomes more and more
annoyed with the boyfriend. It doesn’t help that he is a bit of an English
expert who knows what these terms mean. To placate the vicar he apologises for making
these errors – but he calls them boobs. “STRUNTS!” – thunders the Vicar, not
knowing that he is fact using an archaic term for penis.
Two other words in the sketch are pizzle and dibble, both
of which also mean strunt. I knew pizzle because I had heard it used in the context
of a bull’s organ. Yes, the things we learned in Oaklands Junior School could
make your hair curl. But Dibble? Prior to this, my only understanding of the
word was as a surname, as in Top Cat’s Officer Dibble. Did, I wonder, the
writers at Hanna Barbera have any idea of the original meaning of the slang
term dibble? I’m guessing not, but I will admit that the thought of the writers’
room at Hanna Barbera giggling away at the name that they’d sneaked past the
censors is a pleasing one.
No comments:
Post a Comment