Re: vulgarisms
| From: | Herman Miller <hmiller@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, November 12, 1998, 4:34 |
|---|
On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 22:27:08 -0500, Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> wrote:
>John Cowan wrote:
>> The general pattern in English is that *domestic* animals are
>> insulting: "dog", "cow", "bitch", "horse"; but not "wolf", "lion",
>> "tiger"; still less "rhinoceros", "stegosaurus".
>
>What about "sloth"? That's not a domestic animal.
But "sloth" the animal has to have been a recent discovery (to English
speakers, that is), and I'm sure the "laziness" meaning must have =
preceded
the "slow-moving mammal that hangs upside down from trees" meaning. Of
course, some names of wild animals are insulting ("weasel", "snake", =
"rat")
but there are also a few wild animals with positive connotations ("fox").
=46or some reason, the name "Yellow-bellied Sapsucker" has always sounded
like an insult to me.