1 of 2
1
Queuer
Posted: 24 December 2013 11:26 PM   [ Ignore ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  196
Joined  2013-10-14

Another uncommon word from Tey’s Franchise Affair.

Queuer: one who waits in a queue.

(Tey seems to have an affection for word oddities of French origin)

Interesting that the OED cites Tey’s Franchise Affair as the word’s first usage.  Did she coin this usage? Note, épatéing was not entered in the OED.

Perhaps, just as Laulu assumed with épatéing, queuer is also just another nonce-use by the author.
Queue, is also defined as: A long plait of hair worn hanging down behind from the head or from a wig; a pig-tail.

P.S. A little disappointed in The Franchise Affair’s denouement .

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 05:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4740
Joined  2007-01-03

The OED third edition (December 2007) has a 1921 citation.

It’s not an odd word at all; it’s simply a verb queue + -er, a standard suffix. Pretty normal stuff.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 08:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2014
Joined  2007-02-19

Interesting that the OED cites Tey’s Franchise Affair as the word’s first usage. Did she coin this usage?

I wouldn’t think so. “Queue”, “queueing”, “queuers” were everywhere, in wartime and postwar Britain (WW2, that is).  “Queuer” is a defining word, where Britons are concerned --- I’ve never, ever seen such disciplined queuers in any other part of the world. And it was all done without coercion. Not because they’re tame: simply because they believed it was necessary.  Watching Britons queue helped me understand why Britain never had a bloody revolution like France, despite having just as good reason.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 08:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3493
Joined  2007-01-29

Ahem.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 11:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  196
Joined  2013-10-14
Dave Wilton - 25 December 2013 05:56 AM

The OED third edition (December 2007) has a 1921 citation.

It’s not an odd word at all; it’s simply a verb queue + -er, a standard suffix. Pretty normal stuff.

Interesting, I immediately looked it up in my OED,print second edition, and it cited Tey’s 1949 usage; I therefore assumed that was its first usage.  I was familiar with the noun but not the verb usage.  Nevertheless, it is not cited in any of my other print dictionaries,(American Heritage third edition, Funk and Wagnalls, Webster’s collegiate second edition, Webster’s International second edition,--however, the Webster’s Third New International does have a citation for queuer.)

To deduce that the word is an oddity was inaccurate on my part, but perhaps a not-too-common usage would be a better description, or am I mistaken again?

[ Edited: 25 December 2013 11:16 AM by Logophile ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 02:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2014
Joined  2007-02-19

Ahem.

Well, yes, I did rather go off half-cocked, didn’t I (stammers a bit, struggling frantically to recover equilibrium). But the Civil War (not many people call that a Revolution --- most just call it the Civil War) certainly had little to do with social reform, or class war. It left the British ruling classes still firmly in the saddle—more firmly, if anything, than before—and the British labouring classes just as disenfranchised as previously.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 05:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  156
Joined  2007-02-15

Apparently, a man just materialised out of thin air amongst the line of people waiting outside the doctor’s surgery.

The doctor said it was a miracle queuer.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 12:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2014
Joined  2007-02-19

I had a neighbour once, who said that all queuers should be banned from military service, and preferably, shot. His spelling was not as strong as his views.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 03:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3100
Joined  2007-02-26
BlackGrey - 25 December 2013 05:49 PM

Apparently, a man just materialised out of thin air amongst the line of people waiting outside the doctor’s surgery.

The doctor said it was a miracle queuer.

Was it The Doctor?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 05:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4740
Joined  2007-01-03

Interesting, I immediately looked it up in my OED,print second edition, and it cited Tey’s 1949 usage; I therefore assumed that was its first usage.

The first citation in the OED is not necessarily the first use of a word; in fact, it rarely is. It’s just the earliest verified use in the OED files at the time that editorial work on that particular entry was complete. Words generally come into use orally and are around for some time before they are set into print.

And given that the second edition came out in 1989, before widespread digitization of books, newspapers, and magazines that makes searching for individual words easier, there is a very good chance that any given word in the second edition can now be antedated.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 06:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3493
Joined  2007-01-29

But the Civil War (not many people call that a Revolution—most just call it the Civil War) certainly had little to do with social reform, or class war. It left the British ruling classes still firmly in the saddle—more firmly, if anything, than before—and the British labouring classes just as disenfranchised as previously.

Oh, I know it’s not called “Revolution,” but when you chop the king’s head off and put a bunch of other people in charge, that’s what it is.  And I don’t think you can say it “had little to do with social reform”; it’s a very complicated subject and there are lots of books about it, but it certainly wasn’t just a matter of a personal dislike of King Charlie.  I might also point out that after the Bolshevik Revolution the Russian laboring classes were even more disenfranchised than previously (even if the official rhetoric said otherwise).  But mainly I just wanted to tease you about the idea that English history was polite and bloodless!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 08:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  196
Joined  2013-10-14

The first citation in the OED is not necessarily the first use of a word; in fact, it rarely is. It’s just the earliest verified use in the OED files at the time that editorial work on that particular entry was complete. Words generally come into use orally and are around for some time before they are set into print.

Thanks for the edification. In an earlier post you referred to an OED third edition. I’m assuming that this is an online edition, but I thought that it hadn’t yet been completed.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 10:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3493
Joined  2007-01-29

I’m assuming that this is an online edition, but I thought that it hadn’t yet been completed.

Correct on both counts.  I think they’ve got a decade or so’s work remaining.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 12:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4740
Joined  2007-01-03

It’s a rolling publication, with new entries being published every three months. So the OED Online is a mix of second and third edition entries.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 02:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2014
Joined  2007-02-19

But mainly I just wanted to tease you about the idea that English history was polite and bloodless!

well, you did a right good job. serves me right for expressing myself inadequately. English history’s been anything but bloodless, I agree. what I meant to say was that the English ruling classes, for centuries, successfully conned the people who did the work for them, into believing that it was all a part of God’s plan:
“God bless the squire and his relations,
and keep us in our proper stations - Amen”.
.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 03:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3493
Joined  2007-01-29

That, I completely agree with.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1
 
‹‹ US Dialect Quiz      Ashkenazic Surnames ››