RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]

From: Hohberger, Clive (
Date: Wed Feb 04 2004 - 18:08:16 EST

  • Next message: Mike Ayers: "Pho-f***ing-ology (was: RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-docum ent])"

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Mike Ayers []
    Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 11:59 AM
    To: 'John Burger';
    Subject: RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]

    > From: [
    <> ]On
    > Behalf Of John Burger

    > I actually don't think anyone would really say "be-f***ing-hind" - it

            Yes, they would. I can't say for sure whether or not I've heard
    this exact one before, but I can say that its valid Yankspeak.

    [Hohberger, Clive]

    Actually "be-f***king-hind" is a British grammatical construct, known as the
    "infix profane".
    Speaking as one knowledgable in American idioms,
        there is no-f***ing-way an American would have conceived of the f***ing
    infix construct...
    An American would have said something like:
    "I don't think anyone would actually say they are f***king behind it..."
    Clive ;-)}


    This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential, and may also
    be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not
    review, use, copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this email in
    error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and then delete
    this email.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 04 2004 - 19:07:41 EST