| Author |
Message |
Bob Cunningham
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:02 am
Post subject: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
I've recently come across the phrase "by a long chalk".
It's quite possible I had seen it before and forgotten, but
now it strikes me as a quite strange usage Initially, it
seems easy to imagine that some British person heard "by a
long shot" but repeated it as "by a long chalk" because it
made more sense. "Chalk" had been used in ways related to
marking performance.
The _Oxford English Dictionary_ has first attestations of
the two phrases both in the mid-19th century: "by a long
chalk", 1859"; "by a long shot", 1848; but "a long chalk"
with no "by", 1837-40.
It seems too much of a coincidence for "by a long chalk" and
"by a long shot" to have been coined independently. The
case seems similar in that way to those of "you have another
(think/thing) coming" and "could(n't) care less".
Early _OED_ attestations of "by a long shot":
1848 in Bartlett Dict. Americanisms 215 Mr. Divver
offered a resolution summarily removing the
superintendent, and was quickly told..that he was
going too fast by a long shot.
1861 M. B. CHESNUT Diary 26 Aug. in C. V.
Woodward M. Chesnut's Civil War (1981) 163 ‘They
dont pay the soldiers every week.’ ‘Not by a long
shot,’ cried a soldier laddie.
"Long chalk" without the "by":
1837-40 HALIBURTON Clockm. (1862) 26 Your
factories down east..go ahead on the English a long
chalk.
"By a long chalk":
a1859 DE QUINCEY Syst. Heavens Wks. III. 171
note, As regards the body of water..the Indus ranks
foremost by a long chalk.
Are there sources that would tell us more clearly than the
_OED_ does how the two phrases are related with respect to
chronology and interaction?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Salvatore Volatile
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:02 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
Bob Cunningham wrote:
| Quote: | It seems too much of a coincidence for "by a long chalk" and
"by a long shot" to have been coined independently.
|
But, Sparky, bear in mind that, while for CIC speakers like you and other
Western U.S. Speakers (not to mention eastern ones like ray o'hara),
"chalk" and "shot" have the same vowel (which for convenience we may
represent as /A/), for CINC speakers (including most British speakers)
they have distinct vowels, "chalk" having the 'caught' vowel (which for
convenience we may represent as /O/).
I think CIC speakers might be more likely to conclude that the "shot" and
"chalk" expressions cannot have arisen independently. They sound more
alike in CIC speech than they do in CINC speech. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:39 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | I've recently come across the phrase "by a long chalk".
It's quite possible I had seen it before and forgotten, but
now it strikes me as a quite strange usage Initially, it
seems easy to imagine that some British person heard "by a
long shot" but repeated it as "by a long chalk" because it
made more sense. "Chalk" had been used in ways related to
marking performance.
The _Oxford English Dictionary_ has first attestations of
the two phrases both in the mid-19th century: "by a long
chalk", 1859"; "by a long shot", 1848; but "a long chalk"
with no "by", 1837-40.
It seems too much of a coincidence for "by a long chalk" and
"by a long shot" to have been coined independently.
|
Yes, but now and then, coincidences do happen.
| Quote: | The
case seems similar in that way to those of "you have another
(think/thing) coming" and "could(n't) care less".
Early _OED_ attestations of "by a long shot":
1848 in Bartlett Dict. Americanisms 215 Mr. Divver
offered a resolution summarily removing the
superintendent, and was quickly told..that he was
going too fast by a long shot.
1861 M. B. CHESNUT Diary 26 Aug. in C. V.
Woodward M. Chesnut's Civil War (1981) 163 ¼They
dont pay the soldiers every week.' ¼Not by a long
shot,' cried a soldier laddie.
"Long chalk" without the "by":
1837-40 HALIBURTON Clockm. (1862) 26 Your
factories down east..go ahead on the English a long
chalk.
"By a long chalk":
a1859 DE QUINCEY Syst. Heavens Wks. III. 171
note, As regards the body of water..the Indus ranks
foremost by a long chalk.
Are there sources that would tell us more clearly than the
_OED_ does how the two phrases are related with respect to
chronology and interaction?
|
The AUE Website search leads to a Quinion article:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-not2.htm
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Lawton
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:58 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:02:07 GMT, Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
I've recently come across the phrase "by a long chalk".
It's quite possible I had seen it before and forgotten, but
now it strikes me as a quite strange usage Initially, it
seems easy to imagine that some British person heard "by a
long shot" but repeated it as "by a long chalk" because it
made more sense. "Chalk" had been used in ways related to
marking performance.
|
Well, "by a long chalk" has been part of my vocabulary all my adult life, but I
would never use "by a long shot". "It's a long shot." is OK, to describe
something which is worth trying, but is unlikely to succeed.
--
Jim
the polymoth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Cunningham
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 6:23 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:58:30 GMT, Jim Lawton
<usenet1@jimlawton.TAKEOUTinfo> said:
| Quote: | Well, "by a long chalk" has been part of my vocabulary all
my adult life, but I would never use "by a long shot".
|
That makes me want to know what part of the world you're
posting from. If the UK, the statement is only to be
expected. But if the statement were made by a US poster, it
would be highly interesting, but it would invite the
question of why a US resident had acquired a UK usage..
If you're posting from Australia or New Zealand, it would be
somewhat interesting in that it would be another example of
the more recently separated colonies following the usages of
the mother country.
Sometimes the e-mail address gives a clue as to what part of
the world the posting is coming from. In your case, the
e-mail address is no help.
--
Bob Cunningham, Southern California, USofA
"Short words are best and the old words when short
are best of all." -- Winston Churchill |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:10 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
Are there sources that would tell us more clearly than the
_OED_ does how the two phrases are related with respect to
chronology and interaction?
The AUE Website search leads to a Quinion article:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-not2.htm
|
I think MQ's reference to darts may be a little misleading as the chalk
is used in a standard chalkboard way to write numbers. Ditto skittles.
The pub game which is noted for the use of chalk, however, is shove
ha'penny (or shove halfpenny), aka shovel-board, shuffle board and
others. A single chalk mark represented success in sliding a marker into
a "bed" and "three in a bed" won that division. The furthest bed was a
long chalk away.
--
John Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Lawton
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 2:51 pm
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:23:53 GMT, Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:58:30 GMT, Jim Lawton
usenet1@jimlawton.TAKEOUTinfo> said:
Well, "by a long chalk" has been part of my vocabulary all
my adult life, but I would never use "by a long shot".
That makes me want to know what part of the world you're
posting from. If the UK, the statement is only to be
expected. But if the statement were made by a US poster, it
would be highly interesting, but it would invite the
question of why a US resident had acquired a UK usage..
If you're posting from Australia or New Zealand, it would be
somewhat interesting in that it would be another example of
the more recently separated colonies following the usages of
the mother country.
Sometimes the e-mail address gives a clue as to what part of
the world the posting is coming from. In your case, the
e-mail address is no help.
|
Sorry, I frequently reveal though not this time, that I am in Yorkshire,
England, as you surmised.
--
Jim
the polymoth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Will
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:02 pm
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
Jim Lawton wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:02:07 GMT, Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
I've recently come across the phrase "by a long chalk".
It's quite possible I had seen it before and forgotten, but
now it strikes me as a quite strange usage Initially, it
seems easy to imagine that some British person heard "by a
long shot" but repeated it as "by a long chalk" because it
made more sense. "Chalk" had been used in ways related to
marking performance.
Well, "by a long chalk" has been part of my vocabulary all my adult life, but I
would never use "by a long shot". "It's a long shot." is OK, to describe
something which is worth trying, but is unlikely to succeed.
|
My experience is entirely congruent with thine own. I am from
Woocescestershire, currently domiciled in Glarstershire. I got the
phrase from my father, who was from Fleet out of Perth, Scotland.
Will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Cunningham
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:28 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:04:30 +0000 (UTC), Salvatore Volatile
<me@privacy.net> said:
| Quote: | Bob Cunningham wrote:
It seems too much of a coincidence for "by a long chalk" and
"by a long shot" to have been coined independently.
But, Sparky, bear in mind that, while for CIC speakers like you and other
Western U.S. Speakers (not to mention eastern ones like ray o'hara),
"chalk" and "shot" have the same vowel (which for convenience we may
represent as /A/),
|
Phonemic representation is nebulous. Some speakers
pronounce "chalk" and "shot" with different vowels, but for
some listeners they are in the same phoneme while for
others, different. It depends upon whether the listener
will or will not perceive the two sounds to be the same.
Whether or not I would perceive the "chalk" and "shot"
vowels spoken by a UK speaker to be the same would depend
upon whether I hear them in familiar words or in isolation.
According to the _New Shorter Oxford_, "chalk" is [tSO:k]
(my vowel in "pork"), while "shot" is [SA.t] (the rounded
low back vowel that I can't pronounce with confidence) . In
isolation I would perceive the two vowels to be quite
different, but when I hear them -- unalerted -- spoken in
familiar words, I tend to think I'm hearing the vowel I'm
used to hearing in those words ([A:]).
In my opinion, you would have done better to say "'chalk'
and 'shot' have the same vowel (which for convenience we may
represent as[A])".
| Quote: | for CINC speakers (including most British speakers)
they have distinct vowels, "chalk" having the 'caught' vowel (which for
convenience we may represent as /O/).
I think CIC speakers might be more likely to conclude that the "shot" and
"chalk" expressions cannot have arisen independently. They sound more
alike in CIC speech than they do in CINC speech.
|
You're assuming that whether or not they arose independently
depends only on mistaking one word for another. I think
it's more a matter of trying to find a word to replace one
that doesn't seem to make sense with one that does. If, as
many people believe, "could care less" resulted from
someone's not understanding the meaning of "couldn't care
less" and repeating it as "could care less", that doesn't
imply the "could" and "couldn't" sounded the same to that
someone.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Cunningham
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:43 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 21:39:56 +0100, trio@euronet.nl (Donna
Richoux) said:
| Quote: | Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote:
I've recently come across the phrase "by a long chalk".
It's quite possible I had seen it before and forgotten, but
now it strikes me as a quite strange usage Initially, it
seems easy to imagine that some British person heard "by a
long shot" but repeated it as "by a long chalk" because it
made more sense. "Chalk" had been used in ways related to
marking performance.
The _Oxford English Dictionary_ has first attestations of
the two phrases both in the mid-19th century: "by a long
chalk", 1859"; "by a long shot", 1848; but "a long chalk"
with no "by", 1837-40.
It seems too much of a coincidence for "by a long chalk" and
"by a long shot" to have been coined independently.
Yes, but now and then, coincidences do happen.
The
case seems similar in that way to those of "you have another
(think/thing) coming" and "could(n't) care less".
Early _OED_ attestations of "by a long shot":
1848 in Bartlett Dict. Americanisms 215 Mr. Divver
offered a resolution summarily removing the
superintendent, and was quickly told..that he was
going too fast by a long shot.
1861 M. B. CHESNUT Diary 26 Aug. in C. V.
Woodward M. Chesnut's Civil War (1981) 163 ŒThey
dont pay the soldiers every week.' ŒNot by a long
shot,' cried a soldier laddie.
"Long chalk" without the "by":
1837-40 HALIBURTON Clockm. (1862) 26 Your
factories down east..go ahead on the English a long
chalk.
"By a long chalk":
a1859 DE QUINCEY Syst. Heavens Wks. III. 171
note, As regards the body of water..the Indus ranks
foremost by a long chalk.
Are there sources that would tell us more clearly than the
_OED_ does how the two phrases are related with respect to
chronology and interaction?
The AUE Website search leads to a Quinion article:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-not2.htm
|
That's an interesting article, as one would expect for a
Quinion article, but it doesn't address the point I raised.
It discusses "chalk" and "long chalk", but not "*by* a long
chalk". I was well aware from reading in the _Oxford
English Dictionary_ and other places that "chalk" has
meanings related to rating performance or keeping scores. I
summarized all of that when I said
"Chalk" had been used in ways related to marking
performance.
I continue to believe that one or the other of "by a long
chalk" and "by a long shot" derived from the other. And
since the _OED_ dates the first attestation of "by a long
chalk" 1859 and the first for "by a long shot" 1848, I will
continue to believe-- until I see evidence to the contrary
-- that "by a long chalk" was adapted from "by a long shot". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blue Hornet
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:01 am
Post subject: Re: "by a long (shot/chalk)" |
|
|
Bob Cunningham wrote:
| Quote: | I've recently come across the phrase "by a long chalk".
It's quite possible I had seen it before and forgotten, but
now it strikes me as a quite strange usage Initially, it
seems easy to imagine that some British person heard "by a
long shot" but repeated it as "by a long chalk" because it
made more sense. "Chalk" had been used in ways related to
marking performance.
The _Oxford English Dictionary_ has first attestations of
the two phrases both in the mid-19th century: "by a long
chalk", 1859"; "by a long shot", 1848; but "a long chalk"
with no "by", 1837-40.
It seems too much of a coincidence for "by a long chalk" and
"by a long shot" to have been coined independently. The
case seems similar in that way to those of "you have another
(think/thing) coming" and "could(n't) care less".
Early _OED_ attestations of "by a long shot":
1848 in Bartlett Dict. Americanisms 215 Mr. Divver
offered a resolution summarily removing the
superintendent, and was quickly told..that he was
going too fast by a long shot.
1861 M. B. CHESNUT Diary 26 Aug. in C. V.
Woodward M. Chesnut's Civil War (1981) 163 'They
dont pay the soldiers every week.' 'Not by a long
shot,' cried a soldier laddie.
"Long chalk" without the "by":
1837-40 HALIBURTON Clockm. (1862) 26 Your
factories down east..go ahead on the English a long
chalk.
"By a long chalk":
a1859 DE QUINCEY Syst. Heavens Wks. III. 171
note, As regards the body of water..the Indus ranks
foremost by a long chalk.
Are there sources that would tell us more clearly than the
_OED_ does how the two phrases are related with respect to
chronology and interaction?
|
Interesting discussion of "by a long chalk" here:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-not2.htm
The end of the article also touches on "a long shot" as "outside
chance", because of the obvious increased difficulty of hitting the
target as distance increases.
Just thinking about the negative connotation of "not by a long shot"
implies that the difficulty of achieving whatever feat is next to
impossible, so that "even if you can make a perfect long shot", you
still won't achieve your goal. (This is not exactly what the site's
author says, so if I don't believe him on that, should I believe his
spiel about a long chalk?) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in