I think that the title should be qualified with "American English" since the colloquial uses of the word "ass" are not really a thing in British English.
- "Dude!" = WTF man, I should punch you in the face
- "Dude!" = holy crap, I just got that girl's number!
- "Dude?" = who's there, is there a killer in my house?
- "Dude?" = no shit, for real?
- "Dude!?" = why'd you sleep with my sister?!
- "Dude" = hey Steve
- "Dude." = not cool bro
- "Dude!!!" = you're not gonna believe this!
- "Dude" = stfu before the cop maces you, idiot.
- "Dude..." = did we just see that car flip and roll 11 times down the hill, do you think anyone is alive, I can't believe that just happened
- "Dude." = look man, you're really drunk and me and my girl are trying to have a nice walk and you really need to turn around and walk in the opposite direction of us.
Many words or expressions basically get used as a proxy to carry intonation that has these meanings.
E.g most of the examples above fall in a small set of categories of expressing excitement, incredulity etc. where the carrying word is of less importance. E.g. you can express "cool" or incredulity with "dude", "mate", "fuck", "bro", "awesome", "neat", "man", and I'm sure many others by just layering the same intonation on them; not all intonations will "work" or carry the same meaning on the same set of words (e.g. expressing anger works fine with "fuck" or "bro" or "dude", but not really with "awesome" or "neat" unless you want to give off really confusing mixed emotions) or to the same groups of people, though, so it's certainly somewhat mediated by the meanings of the underlying word, but often surprisingly little.
There certainly are words that are more malleable that way, and words like dude and fuck are high on the list, perhaps because they as standalone expressions carry very little specific meaning in the word itself that can interfere with the intonation and expressed emotional content.
I'm guessing some of it is an age thin with some early-mid 20,s people viewing the thread. "Dude" was all over tv and movies in the 90's and early 2000's.
I noticed one missing in the 201 list at the bottom; it's a two-fer. "Riding one's ass", meaning either to tailgate in a vehicle, or also meaning to nag or irritate.
Micky Flannigan, a uk comedian, does a great routine about when he lived in America and people confused his cockney pronunciation of "house" with the American pronunciation of "Ass".
So at the end of a date he's on the doorstep with a girl and they are saying goodbye:
He says: I'd like to come in your house
She looks shocked. So he says: I won't try to kiss you, I just want to come in your house
The faux-pas is not entirely restricted to cockney pronunciation; here is an example of another UK comedian, Michael McIntyre taking the piss out of TV chef Gino D'ACampo's (Italian) mockney version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCJnO8rzXP0
Basically any vulgar word ends up being overused by the (uneducated) masses by the definition of the word vulgar. I'm not sure why, probably because they don't have the vocabulary to precisely express their thoughts and end up reusing the handful of strong words they do know in new ways and contexts.
Like how a chef who only knows about cayenne and salt wouldn't be using subtle spices like paprika. He's just going to bludgeon every dish with salt and cayenne since those are the two spices he has used the most thus far. He might find some creative uses for cayenne, but that doesn't mean cayenne is suddenly the most versetile and complex spice.
Well, "history is written by the victors", I suppose, but that doesn't make the masses who are "evolving" the language "right". Unless you think it's "right" for the ignorant to redefine words like "literally" and "nonplussed" to mean the exact opposite of their original meanings or to make "could of" a valid grammatical construct.
I really used to think like this. I thought there was a "proper" way to use words and evolution of language by the "uneducated masses" was a bad thing and they were "ignorant" for not sticking with dictionary definitions. I was insufferable.
So is there any value in studying or preserving English grammar and vocabulary at all if it is ultimately meaningless and can easily be redefined by people who have not studied English?
The idea that people who speak differently than you smacks of old-timey classism, right up there with phrenology. Shakespere was as "vulgar" as it got in his day, and to call what he did art what others are doing something else is just bias.
Language is nothing but a set of conventions which necessarily evolves with its userbase.
When I lived in Germany, I explained to someone (in German) that ass means both arse and donkey and they cracked up.
Shrek: "I've got to save my ass" -- meaning his donkey (named Donkey), but Fiona interprets that differently from his intended meaning.
Also, I would interpret piece of ass as sex object, not beautiful. It's about just being used for sex. A less ugly use of the expression is roughly "looking for no-strings-attached sex."
Interesting. As a bilingual/fluent but not native English speaker 'piece of ass' always contained at least an element of beauty. not necessarily, but usually.
I'm a native speaker of American English. Ismo is not wrong. Referring to someone as a "piece of ass" is probably disrespectful or crude, but it absolutely means "holy crap is that person insanely attractive."
Yes, sex objects are typically superficially attractive.
Unless you have some weird fetish, you probably aren't looking for ugly people you barely know to use in bed and discard like they don't matter.
The difference being no one wanders through a garden or museum saying "Those flowers are a piece of ass!" or "That painting is a piece of ass!" to mean "These completely nonsexual objects are amazingly beautiful."
Beautiful women get treated as nothing but sex objects. That doesn't mean euphemisms for "I'd hit that!" are equally synonyms for "That's got incredible visual appeal."
Try explaining to your boss that a website layout is good design in part because "It's a piece of ass!" and see how well that goes.
> As a bilingual/fluent but not native English speaker 'piece of ass' always contained at least an element of beauty.
As a native English speaker it does not contain that in itself, though it's frequently accompanied by a positive qualitative assessment of utility as a sex object (very often also dehumanizing by using wording traditionally used for objects rather than humans, e.g., “that’s a fine piece of ass!”), which assessment is often based on appearance (and frequently accompanied by nonverbal communication or other context which clearlt—often lewdly—indicates that the qualitative assessment of sexual utility is based on appearance, often quite specific features of appearance.)
I'm a native English speaker as well, and I think you're conflating two different uses.
Yes. There is 'fine piece of ass' as one might hear one utter of an uninvolved person to a friend that matches what you are describing.
That changes significantly when the subject to whom the "fine piece of ass" belongs is a direct recipient of the comment. I.e. "Girl, you have/are one fine piece of ass."
In that case there is communicated the sense of appreciation of beauty between the speaker and receiver. There is the also the not necessarily explicit "that I'd like to try," which clearly distinguishes the "appreciative" form from the "sex objectification form."
Be aware this is not license to use the phrase carelessly. Aware of the norms of the company you're keeping must be taken into account. On the American side of the pond, careless banding about of that sort of thing has been growing increasingly problematic in any business casual up, or official social context. It is a solidly informal comment not intended for "polite company".
I'm a blast at parties. For the curious. (I'm really not.)
Slightly off topic..anyone else took a few minutes to figure out how the website navigation really works? I mean you need to move right to see continuation of a single video ?!
I wouldn't say such phrases demonstrate a different meaning of the word 'run', though. The word 'run' just has an abstract meaning related to movement.
63 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 139 ms ] thread- "Dude" = cool
- "Dude" = come on man, really?
- "Dude!" = WTF man, I should punch you in the face
- "Dude!" = holy crap, I just got that girl's number!
- "Dude?" = who's there, is there a killer in my house?
- "Dude?" = no shit, for real?
- "Dude!?" = why'd you sleep with my sister?!
- "Dude" = hey Steve
- "Dude." = not cool bro
- "Dude!!!" = you're not gonna believe this!
- "Dude" = stfu before the cop maces you, idiot.
- "Dude..." = did we just see that car flip and roll 11 times down the hill, do you think anyone is alive, I can't believe that just happened
- "Dude." = look man, you're really drunk and me and my girl are trying to have a nice walk and you really need to turn around and walk in the opposite direction of us.
Etc etc, I'm sure you get the point.
I've also seen it used in stand up several times and I feel like at least one film.
"Dude, Where's My Car?"
Half the dialogue (ok, I'm probably exaggerating a little bit) is the word "dude". Often repeated many times in different intonations.
"Dude, what's mine say?"
"Sweet, what's mine say?"
"Dude, what's mine say?!"
"Sweet! What's mine say?!"
E.g most of the examples above fall in a small set of categories of expressing excitement, incredulity etc. where the carrying word is of less importance. E.g. you can express "cool" or incredulity with "dude", "mate", "fuck", "bro", "awesome", "neat", "man", and I'm sure many others by just layering the same intonation on them; not all intonations will "work" or carry the same meaning on the same set of words (e.g. expressing anger works fine with "fuck" or "bro" or "dude", but not really with "awesome" or "neat" unless you want to give off really confusing mixed emotions) or to the same groups of people, though, so it's certainly somewhat mediated by the meanings of the underlying word, but often surprisingly little.
There certainly are words that are more malleable that way, and words like dude and fuck are high on the list, perhaps because they as standalone expressions carry very little specific meaning in the word itself that can interfere with the intonation and expressed emotional content.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuck#Modern_usage
https://youtu.be/XdfwFDZGnUk
Ignorance: Fucked if I know.
Trouble: I guess I am fucked now!
Fraud: I got fucked at the used car lot.
Aggression: Fuck you!
Displeasure: What the fuck is going on here?
Difficulty: I can’t understand this fucking job.
Incompetence: He is a fuck-off.
Suspicion: What the fuck are you doing?
Enjoyment: I had a fucking good time.
Request: Get the fuck out of here.
Hostility: I’m going to knock your fucking head off.
Greeting: How the fuck are you?
Apathy: Who gives a fuck?
Innovation: Get a bigger fucking hammer.
Surprise: Fuck! You scared the shit out of me!
Anxiety: Today is really fucked.
http://www.spiritualsatya.com/osho-meaning-and-versatility-o...
Those fucked fucking fuckers fucked fucked the fucker.
"fuck" is fascinating in part because it doesn't mean much beyond amplification. It's pure emotion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igh9iO5BxBo&feature=youtu.be
He also does a "clean" version for television, and I think he's done a version for "ass" as well. This was my favorite.
That's literally what the whole article is about.
"In this episode, we explore the history of swearing and obscenities, and we examine Chaucer’s use of bawdy language in the Miller’s Tale"
https://historyofenglishpodcast.com/2019/09/25/episode-129-c...
So at the end of a date he's on the doorstep with a girl and they are saying goodbye:
He says: I'd like to come in your house
She looks shocked. So he says: I won't try to kiss you, I just want to come in your house
Like how a chef who only knows about cayenne and salt wouldn't be using subtle spices like paprika. He's just going to bludgeon every dish with salt and cayenne since those are the two spices he has used the most thus far. He might find some creative uses for cayenne, but that doesn't mean cayenne is suddenly the most versetile and complex spice.
Language is nothing but a set of conventions which necessarily evolves with its userbase.
Shrek: "I've got to save my ass" -- meaning his donkey (named Donkey), but Fiona interprets that differently from his intended meaning.
Also, I would interpret piece of ass as sex object, not beautiful. It's about just being used for sex. A less ugly use of the expression is roughly "looking for no-strings-attached sex."
Unless you have some weird fetish, you probably aren't looking for ugly people you barely know to use in bed and discard like they don't matter.
The difference being no one wanders through a garden or museum saying "Those flowers are a piece of ass!" or "That painting is a piece of ass!" to mean "These completely nonsexual objects are amazingly beautiful."
Beautiful women get treated as nothing but sex objects. That doesn't mean euphemisms for "I'd hit that!" are equally synonyms for "That's got incredible visual appeal."
Try explaining to your boss that a website layout is good design in part because "It's a piece of ass!" and see how well that goes.
As a native English speaker it does not contain that in itself, though it's frequently accompanied by a positive qualitative assessment of utility as a sex object (very often also dehumanizing by using wording traditionally used for objects rather than humans, e.g., “that’s a fine piece of ass!”), which assessment is often based on appearance (and frequently accompanied by nonverbal communication or other context which clearlt—often lewdly—indicates that the qualitative assessment of sexual utility is based on appearance, often quite specific features of appearance.)
Yes. There is 'fine piece of ass' as one might hear one utter of an uninvolved person to a friend that matches what you are describing.
That changes significantly when the subject to whom the "fine piece of ass" belongs is a direct recipient of the comment. I.e. "Girl, you have/are one fine piece of ass."
In that case there is communicated the sense of appreciation of beauty between the speaker and receiver. There is the also the not necessarily explicit "that I'd like to try," which clearly distinguishes the "appreciative" form from the "sex objectification form."
Be aware this is not license to use the phrase carelessly. Aware of the norms of the company you're keeping must be taken into account. On the American side of the pond, careless banding about of that sort of thing has been growing increasingly problematic in any business casual up, or official social context. It is a solidly informal comment not intended for "polite company".
I'm a blast at parties. For the curious. (I'm really not.)
Which would, well, ruin his landing. It works because it's close.
I think I saw a comedian doing such a routine with the word "shit" before...
Not sure which ass dictionary this will fit in