Talk:Bloody
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The theory that this word comes from 'by our lady' is completely unsupportable. By the time it came into common use English had been protestant for centuries. It's not even supposition, it's just an urban legend. -- I would expect so! My own idea is that it came from the same tradition that swore by Christ's body parts. To swear by Christ's blood would be strong. Sean
You should put this into the article, if you are positive about it. Dieter Simon 00:20, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I'd be careful about comparing it with 'damn' in Australian English: 'damn' is rarely used in the media probably because religious people might object to it, but most children would use 'damn' at home before they'd think about using 'bloody'. Also I'm not sure the article should have it as quite so mild a word: only in the last ten or so years has bloody been used on TV for a general audience (the first ad I can remember with it was only in about 2000).
Contents |
[edit] How "bad" is bloody?
How bad is the word "bloody" actually portrayed in Britain? This article didn't answer the question I had when I came here. I'm often told that "bloody" in Britain is as bad as using "fuck" in the US, but is this true? I hear bloody used in British media often (even in such things as Harry Potter), so how bad is this word actually protrayed in Britain? bob rulz 19:48, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
- No, although frowned upon in 'polite company', whatever that may mean, the word "bloody" is nowhere near as bad as "fuck", it is in fact quite mild. You might be reminded to watch your language, but would be forgiven. "Fuck" would be beyond the pale in those circles, and although it is gradually losing its shock effect, it is more often used as an intensifier for want of a more "satisfying" expression, if things go "pear-shaped". Dieter Simon 23:26, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
- My British girlfriend was shocked when they used the term "bloody" in Harry Potter, whereas I, an American, didn't even really notice. In the US the word certainly isn't considered vulgar and isn't even thought to be much of an "intensifier," but merely a flag that tells listeners "the person uttering me is authentically British." It's a campy term more than anything.
[edit] Not bloody likely
How is it possible that there is a page for the word "bloody" and there is no mention of Eliza Doolittle saying the above phrase in Pygmalion? The phrase is even mentioned in the page for the play: "The original stage play shocked audiences by Eliza's use of a swear word... when asked whether she is walking home, [Eliza] replies, 'Not bloody likely!' The actress Mrs Patrick Campbell, for whom Shaw wrote the role, was thought to risk her career by uttering the line." Seems like kind of a big thing to leave out. I'll redo the page myself to include it, but I thought I'd mention it here first. arevolvingonob 00:03 28 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] That Naughty Word
I've always been fascinated by both the etymology and the perceived profanity of this word. The article's explanation of its etymology makes sense to me. Swift using both phrases adjectivally seems to provide a logical link between "by our/your lady" and "bloody."
I'm not sure I buy any of the explanations for why it became a "naughty word." Regardless, it clearly had and has some shock value in British culture, although progressively less so over the years. Glitterspray 06:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Has no one ever speculated that it could be a reference to menstruation? Always seemed a likely etymology to me, although I have no evidence for it. FSharpMajor 14:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Intensifier
I think there should be more details on usage of the word as an intensifier (which seems to be its more common usage anyway). This is because while usually ignored, the few people (notably Americans in this case) who notice the word being used (and don't immediately dismiss it as a ripped off British expression) usually deem it to be a serious expletive roughly interchangeable with the previously mentioned "f word". Medevilenemy 19:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Canada?
Why does this article state this term is used in Canada? I have never used it here. NorthernThunder 13:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I hear it form time to time, but not commonly. My parents used it sometimes, and I use it from time to time myself. Probably more common in families with more recent ties to the UK. Generally considered a very mild curse, like damn. I removed provincial references to usage, having been/lived in these areas I've found no more common usage by location in Canada. Halogenated 20:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I've rarely heard it used. I'm adding Canada to the paragraph on US usage, as a rule its only used in imitations of British or Australian accents, or by people aiming to stand out. If you can find evidence that its use is more common in Canada feel free to revert it. --Rxtreme 06:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not for Polite Company
The explanation of "bloody" seems to mostly explain that the word is NOT a swear word in Great Britain. However, that is very misleading. The word has been used as and treated as a vulgar word for years, probably less offensive than "the f-word". "Bloody" is not used in polite company, except when someone wants to shock. Evidence that "bloody" is rude is in the use of supposedly softer versions of the word, like "bleeding", not unlike "fricking" as a substitute for "f-". The fervor with which the writer describes "bloody" as not obscene is further evidence that it is! People use the word as a swear word, adding intensity the same way "f-" or "damned" or "g-d" might be used as an adjective. The word is not a substitute for "very" or "really".
Let's accept that in British society, "bloody" is not a nice word, and has only been found on TV, the papers, books, and media for the same reason that other vulgar words are: "freedom of expression" and the general relaxing of what is acceptable in society. Like many of George Carlin's Seven Words, "bloody" is heard a lot now, but its real purpose hasn't really changed.
Mostly I am disappointed that I still have not found plausible origins of the word as swear word -- my original reason for checking the Wikipedia. I am not English so will let someone with more authority improve the main article. But let's not pretend the word isn't a swear word. I don't expect to hear the vicar or the Queen using it in the described manner.
(Certainly, we're not talking, here, about the use in "look at the bloody bandage covering his cut arm".)
[edit] Another Theory
I heard a theory from a linguistics expert a few years ago (on the radio) about the origin of "bloody". His theory was that there was an entire class of ancient curses (and these were what you really refer to as curses) that invoked God's body parts. A mild curse might be "God's ear" or "God's nose". They were curses because they invoked God's name and because they humanized him. "God's blood" was the worst curse, not only because it humanized God, but because it implies that God can bleed. I don't have any references available for this off-hand (so of course I won't add it to the article), but I think it is far more plausible than some of the alternatives presented in this article. There are other "curses", which while mild today, were abbreviations for strong curses back in the day. "Zounds", for instance, is supposed to be an contracted abbreviated form of "Christ's Wounds". Strong stuff indeed. SqlPac 00:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Saw this get reverted on recent changes, adding it here
By User:24.234.61.45:
Has it ever occurred to anyone that the word "bloody" may actually be a linguistic devolution from the German "blűd" which can mean, in slang, "stupid" or "ignorant" - a meaning that carries well into the English use of the word. It would not be much different than our use of the term Cold Duck to describe a mixture of carbonated red and white wines - a term which arose out of the easy confusion of ending consonant sounds between the German words for Duck (ente) and End - leavings, remains - (ende). Just a suggestion.
