Bulchin is defined in a 1736 dictionary of slang as:
A chubbingly Boy or Lad.
I don't know which word I prefer, but I think it's chubbingly.
The Inky Fool is off to lunch
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Being the weblog of Mark Forsyth
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
The Most Popular Posts of the Inky Fool
-
This post has already gone up twice; but, as it's the one on which I worked hardest, and as this blog is always gaining and losing adh... -
Just a brief post as I'm running round the country giving talks (Booka Books in Oswestry tonight). I met a German-speaking lady in Edin...
-
Because of all the attention this post is getting, I ought to point out that I was not intending to disclose some outrageous Orwellian con...
-
I've been staying in the flat of an American friend and found amongst his books an American-English dictionary . It is a slim volume, a... -
A poop-noddy is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as: Sexual intercourse (rare) I don't know about you, dear reader, but I... -
Here is the updated list of the fifty most quoted lines of poetry on the internet, including all the readers' suggestions. We started ... -
If I wish to do an impression of a Chinese chap, I will not allow myself to be hampered by the fact that I don't speak a word of Mandar... -
Pluto was the god of the underworld. He was also the god of wealth. That is why we have plutocracy (government by the wealthy), plutocrats ... -
Back when I was writing The Horologicon , there was one word that I desperately wanted to include. But I couldn't because I didn't ...
I have a question. If you look at any of the romance languages, one thing that immediately springs out is the fact that objects have gender. So my question is this - Why does English lack the gender associated with objects the same way many romance languages do? From what I understand, German also uses the gender pronouns for what would otherwise be gender-less objects.
ReplyDeleteIt must be because we are superior and therefore do not need, nor desire, such a false division of pronoun...
ReplyDelete