Discussion:
Mooches: smooches?
(too old to reply)
FB
2006-05-01 12:36:00 UTC
Permalink
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"

Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches" or
something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see how
any meaning of "mooch" would fit.

Thanks in advance.

FB
Tony Cooper
2006-05-01 12:59:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches" or
something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see how
any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.

We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
FB
2006-05-01 13:51:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches" or
something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see how
any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?



FB
Laura F. Spira
2006-05-01 14:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
Would that be public correspondence?
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
FB
2006-05-01 14:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Laura F. Spira
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
Would that be public correspondence?
No, sorry. I just wanted to say that I happened to have found the
sentence in intimate correspondence, though, and encourage hypothesis in
view of that. Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
One can bear in mind a word is invented and yet give it a meaning. I had
conjectured it is the sound of little kisses (by the way, the "moochee"
is a dog).

FB
Tony Cooper
2006-05-01 14:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Laura F. Spira
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
Would that be public correspondence?
No, sorry. I just wanted to say that I happened to have found the
sentence in intimate correspondence, though, and encourage hypothesis in
view of that. Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
One can bear in mind a word is invented and yet give it a meaning. I had
conjectured it is the sound of little kisses (by the way, the "moochee"
is a dog).
Conjecturing about someone else's intimate terms might lead one
astray. For example, if you can across a note from Rey to a lady of
his intimate acquaintance, you might completely miss his specific
meaning.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
Don Phillipson
2006-05-01 16:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
FB
2006-05-01 18:59:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.

FB
Donna Richoux
2006-05-01 19:15:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.
There's a use in the comic strip "Calvin and Hobbes" of "muchas
smooches" (i.e., many kisses). That's pretty close to "mooches."
369 web hits and I don't think they are all references to C&H.
26 hits when spelled as "muches smooches" and 72 when spelled "mooches
smooches."

Have you reached a point where you can be satisfied, yet? We know you
are working through the letters of Truman Capote, private letters to his
friends that are now made public. If this is a pet term, (baby talk,
family term, lovers' sweet nothings) then there is no way to prove
beyond a shadow of a doubt what is meant. Yes, it does make us native
speakers think of "smooches." Yes, you are probably right that any other
sort of "moocher" is irrelevant. I think we're all on the same page and
that we are not likely to get any closer to the truth.

Is all your work going to result in an academic thesis or something? A
translated, footnoted edition? You're working hard enough on it.
--
Best wishes -- Donna Richoux
FB
2006-05-01 21:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Donna Richoux
Post by FB
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.
There's a use in the comic strip "Calvin and Hobbes" of "muchas
smooches" (i.e., many kisses).
I'm such a %$!?$@/&!. Capote writes

"Mucho mooches for Mags and love to you both" (Jack Dunphy and Mags, a
bulldog).

I have no idea why I didn't quote the passage. Probably because I had
come across lots of "mucho", "muchas" and other Spanish and French (and
Italian) expressions before ("mille tendresse [sic]", "finito",
"seƱor"). I assumed it just meant "a lot of".
Calvin and Hobbes is available in Italian. I guess I'll ask a fan.

[...]
Post by Donna Richoux
Have you reached a point where you can be satisfied, yet?
I'll have to ask a fan of Calvin and Hobbes how "muchas smooches" was
translated. I have a hunch already. Anyway, you think Capote is
misquoting C&H, right? You don't suppose it's a tongue-in-cheek
misspelling, that is. Or, rather, we cannot know.

[...]
Post by Donna Richoux
Is all your work going to result in an academic thesis or something? A
translated, footnoted edition? You're working hard enough on it.
God knows. And yes, it is. I'll let you know.

Special thanks!

FB
Donna Richoux
2006-05-01 22:22:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
I'll have to ask a fan of Calvin and Hobbes how "muchas smooches" was
translated. I have a hunch already. Anyway, you think Capote is
misquoting C&H, right?
Well, no, because the times are wrong. You didn't give us a date on the
letter, but Capote died in 1984 and C&H didn't begin until 1985. No, I
suspect that "muchas smooches" or some variation thereof -- exactly how
it is spelled or pronounced wouldn't matter -- had some currency as a
jokey wordplay in the mid-20th century, although not really widely
known. The other possibility is that the similarity of the two words
caused the pun to be invented more than once.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
FB
2006-05-01 22:55:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Donna Richoux
Post by FB
I'll have to ask a fan of Calvin and Hobbes how "muchas smooches" was
translated. I have a hunch already. Anyway, you think Capote is
misquoting C&H, right?
Well, no, because the times are wrong. You didn't give us a date on the
letter,
1976.
Post by Donna Richoux
but Capote died in 1984 and C&H didn't begin until 1985.
Really? Oh, shh... oot. Anyway, I've made my mind up what it means.

FB
sage
2006-05-02 00:44:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.
(Snip)
We know you
are working through the letters of Truman Capote, private letters to his
friends that are now made public.
(Snip)
Ms. Richoux: How do "we know" this? I ask because I have only a couple
of posts including FB's initial one and I cannot see how anyone could
know that he/she is researching Capote's letters. Have I missed a
million previous posts?

Cheers, Sage
FB
2006-05-02 06:07:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Donna Richoux
Post by FB
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.
(Snip)
We know you
are working through the letters of Truman Capote, private letters to his
friends that are now made public. (Snip)
Ms. Richoux: How do "we know" this? I ask because I have only a couple
of posts including FB's initial one and I cannot see how anyone could
know that he/she is researching Capote's letters. Have I missed a
million previous posts?
While writing a post, I often wonder at how many things a person could
gather from it. Anyway, I've opened a number of threads about C.'s letters.

FB
Donna Richoux
2006-05-02 09:41:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Donna Richoux
Post by FB
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.
(Snip)
We know you
are working through the letters of Truman Capote, private letters to his
friends that are now made public.
(Snip)
Ms. Richoux: How do "we know" this?
Oh, all right, "I and some undetermined number of other participants"
Post by Donna Richoux
I ask because I have only a couple
of posts including FB's initial one and I cannot see how anyone could
know that he/she is researching Capote's letters. Have I missed a
million previous posts?
Not a million, no. Google Groups shows me there's been seven threads
since December with posts by fb containing the word Capote.

What I think, and you may agree, is that FB should say more clearly
things like "I'm working on the letters of Truman Capote, and in his
exchange of November 1961 with fellow writer Hixy Pixy, he says..." Then
we would all know what's going on. Instead, FB tends to toss us an
isolated phrase to see if we recognize it as current or meaningful. It's
one approach...
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
FB
2006-05-02 11:14:55 UTC
Permalink
Donna Richoux ha scritto:
[...]
Post by Donna Richoux
What I think, and you may agree, is that FB should say more clearly
things like "I'm working on the letters of Truman Capote, and in his
exchange of November 1961 with fellow writer Hixy Pixy, he says..." Then
we would all know what's going on. Instead, FB tends to toss us an
isolated phrase to see if we recognize it as current or meaningful. It's
one approach...
The "FB approach". No, I do get your point.

FB
sage
2006-05-02 14:59:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Donna Richoux
Post by Donna Richoux
Post by FB
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
My "mooches", I mean.
(Snip)
We know you
are working through the letters of Truman Capote, private letters to his
friends that are now made public.
(Snip)
Ms. Richoux: How do "we know" this?
Oh, all right, "I and some undetermined number of other participants"
Post by Donna Richoux
I ask because I have only a couple
of posts including FB's initial one and I cannot see how anyone could
know that he/she is researching Capote's letters. Have I missed a
million previous posts?
Not a million, no. Google Groups shows me there's been seven threads
since December with posts by fb containing the word Capote.
What I think, and you may agree, is that FB should say more clearly
things like "I'm working on the letters of Truman Capote, and in his
exchange of November 1961 with fellow writer Hixy Pixy, he says..." Then
we would all know what's going on. Instead, FB tends to toss us an
isolated phrase to see if we recognize it as current or meaningful. It's
one approach...
Thank you. And yes, it would help the undetermined number of the rest of
us if some pointers were included.

Cheers, Sage
Robert Bannister
2006-05-02 00:37:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
That's a new one on me. My take on "mooch" is that it is a verb for
shambling aimlessly: "Stop mooching about the house and get on with
something useful."
--
Rob Bannister
m***@bradford.ac.uk
2006-05-02 10:40:31 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
That's a new one on me. My take on "mooch" is that it is a verb for
shambling aimlessly: "Stop mooching about the house and get on with
something useful."
Seconded. I think we may have hit on an AmE/BrE variance here.
Actually, my family recollection of the word, did imply a very slight
relationship to the "cadge" usage, in that we used it to mean shambling
around - not quite *aimlessly* - but sort of vaguely *looking* for
something, without being really aware of what one was looking *for*.
You know, that thing that bored teenagers do - they amble into the
kitchen and start randomly opening cupboards, the fridge, etc. *That's*
mooching. I think.

Mike M
Mark Brader
2006-05-03 16:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Don Phillipson
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
That's a new one on me. My take on "mooch" is that it is a verb for
shambling aimlessly: "Stop mooching about the house and get on with
something useful."
And I'm with Don. Clearly Pondian.

Some years ago some friends were visiting my house and noticed
an old paperback copy of a certain novel, which I'd bought used,
on my shelves. I don't remember for sure which novel, but I think
it was something by Eric Frank Russell, possibly "Wasp".

Well, one of them then said something along these lines: "Once I
read a library copy of that book, and I really liked it. Then I saw
a used copy for sale and I bought it. But it was a British edition,
and on the first page it used 'mooch' in the way that Rob describes.
The image of this character begging for stuff was so disturbing that
I threw the book out."

What could I do? We checked my copy; it was an American edition and
the verb was "amble". So I gave it to them.
--
Mark Brader "It is always dangerous to send authors to jail.
Toronto This removes their chief excuse for not writing."
***@vex.net -- Arthur C. Clarke

My text in this article is in the public domain.
JF
2006-05-03 17:38:45 UTC
Permalink
X-No-Archive: yes
Post by Mark Brader
Some years ago some friends were visiting my house and noticed
an old paperback copy of a certain novel, which I'd bought used,
on my shelves. I don't remember for sure which novel, but I think
it was something by Eric Frank Russell, possibly "Wasp".
Well, one of them then said something along these lines: "Once I
read a library copy of that book, and I really liked it. Then I saw
a used copy for sale and I bought it. But it was a British edition,
and on the first page it used 'mooch' in the way that Rob describes.
The image of this character begging for stuff was so disturbing that
I threw the book out."
Of that book, Terry Pratchett said that it was book that he wished he'd
written. An hilarious terrorist's bible.
--
James Follett. Novelist. (G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
The Silent Vulcan trilogy, starting with 'The Temple of the Winds', on BBC7
Sundays 1840.
Don Aitken
2006-05-03 20:48:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Don Phillipson
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
That's a new one on me. My take on "mooch" is that it is a verb for
shambling aimlessly: "Stop mooching about the house and get on with
something useful."
And I'm with Don. Clearly Pondian.
Some years ago some friends were visiting my house and noticed
an old paperback copy of a certain novel, which I'd bought used,
on my shelves. I don't remember for sure which novel, but I think
it was something by Eric Frank Russell, possibly "Wasp".
Well, one of them then said something along these lines: "Once I
read a library copy of that book, and I really liked it. Then I saw
a used copy for sale and I bought it. But it was a British edition,
and on the first page it used 'mooch' in the way that Rob describes.
The image of this character begging for stuff was so disturbing that
I threw the book out."
What could I do? We checked my copy; it was an American edition and
the verb was "amble". So I gave it to them.
I have an American edition of that; it's the second word on the first
page. "He ambled into the room, sat in the indicated chair, and said
nothing". I'm a bit surprised by the separate British edition though;
surely the economics of SF publishing in the fifties wouldn't run to
that? And, although Russell was British, all his stuff was written in
an American style for the American market. "Wasp" is "copyright 1957
Thomas Bouregy and Company".
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"
JF
2006-05-03 22:41:19 UTC
Permalink
X-No-Archive: yes
Post by Don Aitken
I have an American edition of that; it's the second word on the first
page. "He ambled into the room, sat in the indicated chair, and said
nothing". I'm a bit surprised by the separate British edition though;
surely the economics of SF publishing in the fifties wouldn't run to
that? And, although Russell was British, all his stuff was written in
an American style for the American market. "Wasp" is "copyright 1957
Thomas Bouregy and Company".
For years as a kid I thought Russell was American. He captured the
American idiom rather well. He was John Campbell's favourite writer.
I've lost count of many versions of Next of Kin I've read. Short story,
novella, novel.
--
James Follett. Novelist. (G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
The Silent Vulcan trilogy, starting with 'The Temple of the Winds', on BBC7
Sundays 1840.
Robin Bignall
2006-05-02 21:41:52 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:58:50 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by FB
Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
Yes: the verb mooch is slang or casual for cadge, scrounge,
beg etc., as in "Can I mooch a cigarette from you?"
In AmE, yes. In BrE the verb "to mooch" means "to loiter in a bored
or listless manner (mooching around)". The noun "a mooch" is a single
instance of mooching, although I can't recall anyone ever using it
that way. ORIGIN ME (in the sense ‘to hoard’): prob. from
Anglo-Norman Fr. muscher ‘hide, skulk’. (COD10)
--
Robin
Hertfordshire, England
ray o'hara
2006-05-01 19:54:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Laura F. Spira
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
Would that be public correspondence?
No, sorry. I just wanted to say that I happened to have found the
sentence in intimate correspondence, though, and encourage hypothesis in
view of that. Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
One can bear in mind a word is invented and yet give it a meaning. I had
conjectured it is the sound of little kisses (by the way, the "moochee"
is a dog).
FB
Mooch means to casually borrow, You'd mooch some potato chips or $5 from
a friend.
Being known as a mooch or moocher is akin to being a pain in the ass.
j***@yahoo.com
2006-05-01 20:39:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Laura F. Spira
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
Would that be public correspondence?
No, sorry. I just wanted to say that I happened to have found the
sentence in intimate correspondence, though, and encourage hypothesis in
view of that. Doesn't a native speaker take "mooches" to mean something?
One can bear in mind a word is invented and yet give it a meaning. I had
conjectured it is the sound of little kisses (by the way, the "moochee"
is a dog).
Then another hypothesis is that it means treats, tidbits that the dog
mooches from Truman when he's around. But we can only conjecture.
--
Jerry Friedman
R H Draney
2006-05-01 21:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@yahoo.com
Then another hypothesis is that it means treats, tidbits that the dog
mooches from Truman when he's around. But we can only conjecture.
ObDataPoint: the cat in the "Mutts" comic strip is named Mooch...this is
appropriate, as cats are more adept at begging for treats than are dogs...when a
dog begs, you give him the treat because you feel sorry for him, and if you
withhold it he eventually loses interest and gives up the effort...when a cat
begs, it's at once evident that this is only the first phase of a
well-thought-out plan, and if the initial begging fails to elicit the desired
response, the cat stands fully ready to (1) reach up as if offering to meet you
halfway, (2) mew mournfully, (3) roll around and act kittenish, (4) snuggle up
to whatever part of your body he can reach, and (5) pretend to lose interest,
then sneak up behind you and take the treat by stealth or force....r
--
I may not know much about art, but I know
what they tell me I'm supposed to like.
Tony Cooper
2006-05-01 14:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches" or
something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see how
any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
sign-off.
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Then the writer would be expected to use words that convey the
meaning.
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
I don't recall corresponding to my wife publicly. There are those
that place special greetings to wives, husbands, and lovers in
classified ads on holidays, but I am not one of them.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
FB
2006-05-01 14:31:16 UTC
Permalink
[...]
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Then the writer would be expected to use words that convey the
meaning.
Nonetheless, when you use a non-word, you do want to say something
specific, something you and the other person know and possibly a native
speaker would be able to infer.
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
I don't recall corresponding to my wife publicly.
Of course not. Sorry. See reply to Laura.

FB
Tony Cooper
2006-05-01 14:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
[...]
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Then the writer would be expected to use words that convey the
meaning.
Nonetheless, when you use a non-word, you do want to say something
specific, something you and the other person know and possibly a native
speaker would be able to infer.
A non-word used in intimate correspondence usually has meaning enough
to the parties involved. There's no "native speaker" aspect to it.
In fact, there could be instances where the term is based on a
non-native speaker corruption.

For example, if one English-only-speaking person had heard the term
"mon cherie" but corrupted it to "Mowsharee" (thinking this was the
correct word) when writing to a second party, then that non-word might
become an intimate term between the two people and be used in later
correspondence with a meaning known only to the two people involved.

Your error is trying to make something logical out of something that
might have a very illogical origin.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
sage
2006-05-02 15:02:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
[...]
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.
Then the writer would be expected to use words that convey the
meaning.
Nonetheless, when you use a non-word, you do want to say something
specific, something you and the other person know and possibly a native
speaker would be able to infer.
A non-word used in intimate correspondence usually has meaning enough
to the parties involved. There's no "native speaker" aspect to it.
In fact, there could be instances where the term is based on a
non-native speaker corruption.
For example, if one English-only-speaking person had heard the term
"mon cherie" but corrupted it to "Mowsharee" (thinking this was the
correct word) when writing to a second party, then that non-word might
become an intimate term between the two people and be used in later
correspondence with a meaning known only to the two people involved.
Your error is trying to make something logical out of something that
might have a very illogical origin.
Hence mondegreens, j's'pose.

Cheers, Sage
Sara Lorimer
2006-05-01 17:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by FB
Post by Tony Cooper
We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
be used in public correspondence.
Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
I don't recall corresponding to my wife publicly.
Your letters to your sis do leak out...
--
SML
R J Valentine
2006-05-01 14:57:09 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 01 May 2006 15:51:23 +0200 FB <***@tin.it> wrote:

} Tony Cooper ha scritto:
}> On Mon, 01 May 2006 14:36:00 +0200, FB <***@tin.it>
}> wrote:
}>
}>> "Mooches for X and love to you both.
}>> <signature>"
}>>
}>> Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches" or
}>> something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see how
}>> any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
}>
}> I don't think you can assume that something like this is based on any
}> real definition of a word. It's some personal non-word used as a
}> sign-off.
}
} But I suppose the writer wants to convey some meaning.

It might mean "dry smooches" or it might mean "borrowings sans intent to
repay" or it might mean something else entirely. There's just no telling
without more context. I'd guess "smooches". I know someone who used the
term "moochie-poochie" to refer to someone else back in the fifties (but
it was never clear exactly what it meant), so the term is at least
possible.

}> We have a few non-words we use in our family. They go back to words
}> used in error by the kids when they were very small. They would never
}> be used in public correspondence.
}
} Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?

That's possible. The "love to you both" doesn't exactly suggest public
correspondence.
--
rjv
FB
2006-05-01 15:05:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by R J Valentine
}>
}>> "Mooches for X and love to you both.
}>> <signature>"
[...]
Post by R J Valentine
} Not even with one's husband/wife/companion?
That's possible. The "love to you both" doesn't exactly suggest public
correspondence.
It's a letter closing: "mooches" might be replaced with, say, "hugs".


FB
Evan Kirshenbaum
2006-05-01 15:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
My guess would be that X is the recipients' child, who calls (or
called, when little) kisses "mooches", a mispronunciation of
"smooches". I'd see this as an in-joke.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |There is no such thing as bad data,
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |only data from bad homes.
Palo Alto, CA 94304

***@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
FB
2006-05-01 15:29:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
My guess would be that X is the recipients' child
Uh, I'm so sorry. I wrote "x" (x, y, z, i.e. any name). It's a dog.

FB
Evan Kirshenbaum
2006-05-01 15:55:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean
"smooches" or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also
because I don't see how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
My guess would be that X is the recipients' child
Uh, I'm so sorry. I wrote "x" (x, y, z, i.e. any name). It's a dog.
Then unless the dog is exceedingly precocious, it's not the originator
of the word. I'd still guess that it derives from a mispronunciation
of "smooch" by some small child known to sender and recipients.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |I value writers such as Fiske.
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |They serve as valuable object
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |lessons by showing that the most
|punctilious compliance with the
***@hpl.hp.com |rules of usage has so little to do
(650)857-7572 |with either writing or thinking
|well.
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | --Richard Hershberger
CDB
2006-05-01 20:34:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by FB
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean
"smooches" or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also
because I don't see how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
My guess would be that X is the recipients' child
Uh, I'm so sorry. I wrote "x" (x, y, z, i.e. any name). It's a dog.
Then unless the dog is exceedingly precocious, it's not the
originator of the word. I'd still guess that it derives from a
mispronunciation of "smooch" by some small child known to sender
and recipients.
People will talk baby talk to dogs, especially small ones. I suspect
Capote is referring to a remembered visit with his correspondent
during which furbaby X was encouraged to give s-mooches to the
celebrated author.
Tony Cooper
2006-05-01 19:17:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
Post by Evan Kirshenbaum
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches"
or something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see
how any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
My guess would be that X is the recipients' child
Uh, I'm so sorry. I wrote "x" (x, y, z, i.e. any name). It's a dog.
Ah, well, then. All is now clear. "Mooches" is what a dog with
impacted anal glands does. It mooches its butt along the ground.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
Don Aitken
2006-05-01 15:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by FB
"Mooches for X and love to you both.
<signature>"
Now, I have no evidence for this, but does "mooches" mean "smooches" or
something of the kind ("little kisses")? Also because I don't see how
any meaning of "mooch" would fit.
It's something that frails do -
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/blues+brothers/minnie+the+moocher_20020714.html
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"
Loading...