You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Shagging your mates wife
March 29 2024 8.54am

Shagging your mates wife

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 6 of 10 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

 

View Canterbury Palace's Profile Canterbury Palace Flag Whitstable 24 Sep 18 7.33pm Send a Private Message to Canterbury Palace Add Canterbury Palace as a friend

This place has changed. There was once a time that it would have been impossible to get through 5 pages of a thread like this without someone demanding pictorial ‘evidence’. Let alone neglecting that very basic duty to discuss the works of Chaucer. For shame.

 


We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold...

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View steeleye20's Profile steeleye20 Online Flag Croydon 24 Sep 18 7.48pm Send a Private Message to steeleye20 Add steeleye20 as a friend

The wife ran off with our next door neighbour last week.

I do miss him..............


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View chris123's Profile chris123 Flag hove actually 24 Sep 18 7.59pm Send a Private Message to chris123 Add chris123 as a friend

Originally posted by PalazioVecchio

what if your best mate's missus looks like Anne Widdicombe ?

We can land a man on the moon, but not on Ann Widdecombe.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View ex hibitionist's Profile ex hibitionist Flag Hastings 24 Sep 18 8.12pm Send a Private Message to ex hibitionist Add ex hibitionist as a friend

Originally posted by chris123

We can land a man on the moon, but not on Ann Widdecombe.

AW when in her prime? Would you? By jove sir you most certainly would have done [Link] ... shocking what age can do. You lads impress me, I've barely got the energy to be faithful these days let alone unfaithful, though maybe a change is as good as a rest!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View iheartcpfc's Profile iheartcpfc Flag SE25 24 Sep 18 8.57pm Send a Private Message to iheartcpfc Add iheartcpfc as a friend

c***'s trick

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
chateauferret Flag 24 Sep 18 10.09pm

Originally posted by Badger11

Respect and no problem.

It wouldn't be the first time that words change their meaning Gay being the obvious one as in Gay bachelor originally meaning a young man chasing women. Maybe I should start a thread about how words have changed over time which of course is the beauty of English and why no group shoudl be allowed to claim "this is our word".

Edited by Badger11 (24 Sep 2018 9.06am)

Semantic change happens in all languages, even in that slowest-changing of all Indo-European languages Icelandic, which is nearly mutually intelligble with Old Norse. It is driven at least in part by changes in the world around us, as predicted by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is also motivated by fashion, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic factors, and by the fact that language doesn't like synonyms, i.e. if you have two words meaning the same thing, one of the moves a bit so that both remain useful and distinct.

A fine example often quoted is Old English gesaelig, which meant "happy, prosperous" and moved through "blessed, pious, innocent" (C12), "harmless, pathetic" (C13), "weak, weak-willed" (C14), "feebleminded, foolish" (C16), to (Modern English silly) "dizzy, dazed, insensible" as in knocked silly (C19) to "trivial, pointless" and "ridiculous, laughable" (today). The cognate German word, selig, means "blessed, happy" (as in Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, "Blessed are they that mourn", Ps. 25 : 6).

"Gay" is an example of a euphemism that once provided a fig leaf to cover something people didn't want to talk about or admit existed. It has become respectable because of the change in attitudes about those things, not because of the change in meaning of the word itself. But what has happened is that the original meanings of the word, "merry, jolly; brightly-coloured" have given way and it's no longer usual to use the word in those senses. An originally similarly-meaning word, merry, came during the 19th century to mean "pissed". Usually euphemisms go out of fashion and disappear, however.

I think I wrote about this somewhere before, but English grammar, being very analytic (i.e. not inflecting words much but using word order to convey sentence structure) allows words to change their functions easily. For example, modern social media usage allows "like" to be used as a noun and "heart" as a verb, despite there existing perfectly good words of the "correct" part of speech already ("approval" and "love" respectively). One of our favourite words on these fora is s***(e) but despite properly being a noun it is often used as an adjective: "How s***e were we today?" This can happen because English grammar can let you actually not be able to tell whether it's a noun or an adjective. "The ref was s***e today". Is s***e here a noun complement of be, or a predicate adjective? (once upon a time we might have required the latter to be s***ty, but actually I don't think that means the same any more: "covered in s***e" rather than "unfavourably comparable to s***e" ). Oh, and you can use it as an adverb too. "I thought Bloggs played s***e today". Does that mean the same as "... played like s***e"? I don't know. Probably the speaker was taking a shortcut, but you might say that the former looks like a metaphor and the latter like a simile.


Edited by chateauferret (24 Sep 2018 10.26pm)

 


============
The Ferret
============

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 24 Sep 18 10.30pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Originally posted by chateauferret

Semantic change happens in all languages, even in that slowest-changing of all Indo-European languages Icelandic, which is nearly mutually intelligble with Old Norse. It is driven at least in part by changes in the world around us, as predicted by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is also motivated by fashion, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic factors, and by the fact that language doesn't like synonyms, i.e. if you have two words meaning the same thing, one of the moves a bit so that both remain useful and distinct.

A fine example often quoted is Old English gesaelig, which meant "happy, prosperous" and moved through "blessed, pious, innocent" (C12), "harmless, pathetic" (C13), "weak, weak-willed" (C14), "feebleminded, foolish" (C16), to (Modern English silly) "dizzy, dazed, insensible" as in knocked silly (C19) to "trivial, pointless" and "ridiculous, laughable" (today). The cognate German word, selig, means "blessed, happy" (as in Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, "Blessed are they that mourn", Ps. 25 : 6).

"Gay" is an example of a euphemism that once provided a fig leaf to cover something people didn't want to talk about or admit existed. It has become respectable because of the change in attitudes about those things, not because of the change in meaning of the word itself. But what has happened is that the original meanings of the word, "merry, jolly; brightly-coloured" have given way and it's no longer usual to use the word in those senses. An originally similarly-meaning word, merry, came during the 19th century to mean "pissed". Usually euphemisms go out of fashion and disappear, however.

I think I wrote about this somewhere before, but English grammar, being very analytic (i.e. not inflecting words much but using word order to convey sentence structure) allows words to change their functions easily. For example, modern social media usage allows "like" to be used as a noun and "heart" as a verb, despite there existing perfectly good words of the "correct" part of speech already ("approval" and "love" respectively). One of our favourite words on these fora is s***(e) but despite properly being a noun it is often used as an adjective: "How s***e were we today?" This can happen because English grammar can let you actually not be able to tell whether it's a noun or an adjective. "The ref was s***e today". Is s***e here a noun complement of be, or a predicate adjective? (once upon a time we might have required the latter to be s***ty, but actually I don't think that means the same any more: "covered in s***e" rather than "unfavourably comparable to s***e" ). Oh, and you can use it as an adverb too. "I thought Bloggs played s***e today". Does that mean the same as "... played like s***e"? I don't know. Probably the speaker was taking a shortcut, but you might say that the former looks like a metaphor and the latter like a simile.


Edited by chateauferret (24 Sep 2018 10.26pm)

Coo. A man of depth. What on earth are you doing on the HOL? And how dare you be interesting and knowledgeable at the same time.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 24 Sep 18 11.41pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by chateauferret

Semantic change happens in all languages, even in that slowest-changing of all Indo-European languages Icelandic, which is nearly mutually intelligble with Old Norse. It is driven at least in part by changes in the world around us, as predicted by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is also motivated by fashion, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic factors, and by the fact that language doesn't like synonyms, i.e. if you have two words meaning the same thing, one of the moves a bit so that both remain useful and distinct.

A fine example often quoted is Old English gesaelig, which meant "happy, prosperous" and moved through "blessed, pious, innocent" (C12), "harmless, pathetic" (C13), "weak, weak-willed" (C14), "feebleminded, foolish" (C16), to (Modern English silly) "dizzy, dazed, insensible" as in knocked silly (C19) to "trivial, pointless" and "ridiculous, laughable" (today). The cognate German word, selig, means "blessed, happy" (as in Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, "Blessed are they that mourn", Ps. 25 : 6).

"Gay" is an example of a euphemism that once provided a fig leaf to cover something people didn't want to talk about or admit existed. It has become respectable because of the change in attitudes about those things, not because of the change in meaning of the word itself. But what has happened is that the original meanings of the word, "merry, jolly; brightly-coloured" have given way and it's no longer usual to use the word in those senses. An originally similarly-meaning word, merry, came during the 19th century to mean "pissed". Usually euphemisms go out of fashion and disappear, however.

I think I wrote about this somewhere before, but English grammar, being very analytic (i.e. not inflecting words much but using word order to convey sentence structure) allows words to change their functions easily. For example, modern social media usage allows "like" to be used as a noun and "heart" as a verb, despite there existing perfectly good words of the "correct" part of speech already ("approval" and "love" respectively). One of our favourite words on these fora is s***(e) but despite properly being a noun it is often used as an adjective: "How s***e were we today?" This can happen because English grammar can let you actually not be able to tell whether it's a noun or an adjective. "The ref was s***e today". Is s***e here a noun complement of be, or a predicate adjective? (once upon a time we might have required the latter to be s***ty, but actually I don't think that means the same any more: "covered in s***e" rather than "unfavourably comparable to s***e" ). Oh, and you can use it as an adverb too. "I thought Bloggs played s***e today". Does that mean the same as "... played like s***e"? I don't know. Probably the speaker was taking a shortcut, but you might say that the former looks like a metaphor and the latter like a simile.


Edited by chateauferret (24 Sep 2018 10.26pm)

I am glad a never started a thread on this subject you would have blown me out of the water.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Helmet46's Profile Helmet46 Flag Croydon 25 Sep 18 6.56am Send a Private Message to Helmet46 Add Helmet46 as a friend

Show her how it feels to be betrayed by a friend and shag your mate instead.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Forest Hillbilly's Profile Forest Hillbilly Flag in a hidey-hole 25 Sep 18 7.18am Send a Private Message to Forest Hillbilly Add Forest Hillbilly as a friend

this thread needs,.......photos

 


"The facts have changed", Rishi Sunak

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View stuckinbristol's Profile stuckinbristol Flag In the woodwork. 25 Sep 18 8.37am Send a Private Message to stuckinbristol Add stuckinbristol as a friend

Originally posted by chateauferret

Semantic change happens in all languages, even in that slowest-changing of all Indo-European languages Icelandic, which is nearly mutually intelligble with Old Norse. It is driven at least in part by changes in the world around us, as predicted by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is also motivated by fashion, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic factors, and by the fact that language doesn't like synonyms, i.e. if you have two words meaning the same thing, one of the moves a bit so that both remain useful and distinct.

A fine example often quoted is Old English gesaelig, which meant "happy, prosperous" and moved through "blessed, pious, innocent" (C12), "harmless, pathetic" (C13), "weak, weak-willed" (C14), "feebleminded, foolish" (C16), to (Modern English silly) "dizzy, dazed, insensible" as in knocked silly (C19) to "trivial, pointless" and "ridiculous, laughable" (today). The cognate German word, selig, means "blessed, happy" (as in Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, "Blessed are they that mourn", Ps. 25 : 6).

"Gay" is an example of a euphemism that once provided a fig leaf to cover something people didn't want to talk about or admit existed. It has become respectable because of the change in attitudes about those things, not because of the change in meaning of the word itself. But what has happened is that the original meanings of the word, "merry, jolly; brightly-coloured" have given way and it's no longer usual to use the word in those senses. An originally similarly-meaning word, merry, came during the 19th century to mean "pissed". Usually euphemisms go out of fashion and disappear, however.

I think I wrote about this somewhere before, but English grammar, being very analytic (i.e. not inflecting words much but using word order to convey sentence structure) allows words to change their functions easily. For example, modern social media usage allows "like" to be used as a noun and "heart" as a verb, despite there existing perfectly good words of the "correct" part of speech already ("approval" and "love" respectively). One of our favourite words on these fora is s***(e) but despite properly being a noun it is often used as an adjective: "How s***e were we today?" This can happen because English grammar can let you actually not be able to tell whether it's a noun or an adjective. "The ref was s***e today". Is s***e here a noun complement of be, or a predicate adjective? (once upon a time we might have required the latter to be s***ty, but actually I don't think that means the same any more: "covered in s***e" rather than "unfavourably comparable to s***e" ). Oh, and you can use it as an adverb too. "I thought Bloggs played s***e today". Does that mean the same as "... played like s***e"? I don't know. Probably the speaker was taking a shortcut, but you might say that the former looks like a metaphor and the latter like a simile.


Edited by chateauferret (24 Sep 2018 10.26pm)


Yep, all that....but would you shag your mate's wife?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 25 Sep 18 9.24am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by chateauferret

Semantic change happens in all languages, even in that slowest-changing of all Indo-European languages Icelandic, which is nearly mutually intelligble with Old Norse. It is driven at least in part by changes in the world around us, as predicted by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is also motivated by fashion, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic factors, and by the fact that language doesn't like synonyms, i.e. if you have two words meaning the same thing, one of the moves a bit so that both remain useful and distinct.

A fine example often quoted is Old English gesaelig, which meant "happy, prosperous" and moved through "blessed, pious, innocent" (C12), "harmless, pathetic" (C13), "weak, weak-willed" (C14), "feebleminded, foolish" (C16), to (Modern English silly) "dizzy, dazed, insensible" as in knocked silly (C19) to "trivial, pointless" and "ridiculous, laughable" (today). The cognate German word, selig, means "blessed, happy" (as in Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, "Blessed are they that mourn", Ps. 25 : 6).

"Gay" is an example of a euphemism that once provided a fig leaf to cover something people didn't want to talk about or admit existed. It has become respectable because of the change in attitudes about those things, not because of the change in meaning of the word itself. But what has happened is that the original meanings of the word, "merry, jolly; brightly-coloured" have given way and it's no longer usual to use the word in those senses. An originally similarly-meaning word, merry, came during the 19th century to mean "pissed". Usually euphemisms go out of fashion and disappear, however.

I think I wrote about this somewhere before, but English grammar, being very analytic (i.e. not inflecting words much but using word order to convey sentence structure) allows words to change their functions easily. For example, modern social media usage allows "like" to be used as a noun and "heart" as a verb, despite there existing perfectly good words of the "correct" part of speech already ("approval" and "love" respectively). One of our favourite words on these fora is s***(e) but despite properly being a noun it is often used as an adjective: "How s***e were we today?" This can happen because English grammar can let you actually not be able to tell whether it's a noun or an adjective. "The ref was s***e today". Is s***e here a noun complement of be, or a predicate adjective? (once upon a time we might have required the latter to be s***ty, but actually I don't think that means the same any more: "covered in s***e" rather than "unfavourably comparable to s***e" ). Oh, and you can use it as an adverb too. "I thought Bloggs played s***e today". Does that mean the same as "... played like s***e"? I don't know. Probably the speaker was taking a shortcut, but you might say that the former looks like a metaphor and the latter like a simile.


Edited by chateauferret (24 Sep 2018 10.26pm)

Captain Mainwaring " I was wondering when someone would come up with this".

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 6 of 10 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Shagging your mates wife