 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007Chips on Shoulders
"He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit argumentative and grumpy". What is a 'chip', and why is it on someone's shoulder? > "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit > argumentative and grumpy". > > What is a 'chip', and why is it on someone's shoulder? He has a chip on his shoulder daring you to knock it off. He could then deck you for doing that.  SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/ > > "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit > > argumentative and grumpy". [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > He has a chip on his shoulder daring you to knock it off. He could then > deck you for doing that. A wood chip. >>> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit >>> argumentative and grumpy". [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > A wood chip. How much wood would a wood chip chip if a ... No, I can't, I'm going to lie down. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford [snip] > > What is a 'chip', and why is it on someone's shoulder? > > He has a chip on his shoulder daring you to knock it off. He could then > deck you for doing that. [snip] A 1996 posting at this newsgroup: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/browse_frm/thread/6927fd2fa1e93 83d/514768c499e1a5f8?lnk=gst&q=chip+on+shoulder&rnum=2#514768c499e1a5f8 [excerpt:] >From the online OED: 1830 Long Isl. Tel. (Hempstead, N.Y.) 20 May 3/5 When two churlish boys were determined to fight, a chip would be placed on the shoulder of one, and the other demanded to knock it off at his peril. This is in an entry for "chip". The discussion preceding it says: a chip on one's shoulder (orig. U.S.), carried as a challenge to others (see earlier quots.); hence, a display of defiance or ill-humour; an unforgotten grievance; a sense of inferiority characterized by a quickness to take offence. Adrian Pepper. [end excerpt] Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego > [snip] > > > What is a 'chip', and why is it on someone's shoulder? [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > ill-humour; an unforgotten grievance; a sense of inferiority > characterized by a quickness to take offence. Has anybody seen the full original 1830 article? I'd like to know the context, as it seems a rather unlikely custom. If the piece quoted is merely an explanation of the expression, I beg leave to suspect it of being a folk-etymology. If it is only an attempt to explain an idiom, I offer a slightly more complex and speculative folk-etymology of my own. Kids have plenty of sayings which by the rules of rough play allow moderate violence. "Do you collect stamps?" or "How's your bad foot?" said as you stamp on another's foot. "How's your back, Jack?" asked as you slap the victim enthusiastically between the shoulder-blades. We had a thing involving the pretence that the other had something on his tie: you "solicitously" rubbed a finger down his tie in such a way that it flicked up into his face. So here's my conjecture, FWIW. Boy A whacks boy B on the shoulder; A says "What did you do that for?" and B says "I was just brushing a chip off your shoulder." Ha, ha. Thence, we could move to a response to a perceived attack or slight, "Don't get at me! I haven't got a chip on my shoulder!" Thence, only slightly illogically, "He's got a chip on his shoulder." There need never have been a real chip: and if there was, why did the custom die out? SignatureMike. [snip] > So here's my conjecture, FWIW. Boy A whacks boy B on the shoulder; A > says "What did you do that for?" and B says "I was just brushing a chip [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > his shoulder." There need never have been a real chip: and if there > was, why did the custom die out? [snip] And my conjecture for the origin of "He's got a bug up his arse" goes like this: Lord Nelson asked for his red trousers when advised that there were four French frigates on the horizon. After explaining that there might be bloodshed and he didn't want sailors to over-react to the sight of blood on his pants, he was advised that there were forty-four French frigates on the horizon. The admiral then asked for brown pants, but disguised his real motive for so asking by saying he had a bug up his arse. Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego > > >From the online OED: > > > > 1830 Long Isl. Tel. (Hempstead, N.Y.) 20 May 3/5 When two churlish > > boys were determined to fight, a chip would be placed on the > > shoulder of one, and the other demanded to knock it off at his > > peril. > Has anybody seen the full original 1830 article? I'd like to know the > context, as it seems a rather unlikely custom. If the piece quoted is > merely an explanation of the expression, I beg leave to suspect it of > being a folk-etymology. If it is only an attempt to explain an idiom, I > offer a slightly more complex and speculative folk-etymology of my own. I think you were skeptical last time this was discussed, or someone was. I've seen it described in enough 19th century writing to have no doubt it was an actual custom. A real advantage to this practice was that it excused both parties from the sin of "starting it" or taking the first punch. The one who put the chip on his own shoulder could say that he didn't swing first, the other guy did who knocked off the chip. The guy who knocked off the chip could say he didn't start it, he just knocked on the chip, it was the first guy who responded after that with a real blow. > Kids have plenty of sayings which by the rules of rough play allow > moderate violence. "Do you collect stamps?" or "How's your bad foot?" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > tie: you "solicitously" rubbed a finger down his tie in such a way that > it flicked up into his face. If you're thinking that the chip on the shoulder must belong to this sort of pain-inducing action, no wonder you're skeptical. It doesn't fit. It's a symbolic gesture without any pain. > So here's my conjecture, FWIW. Boy A whacks boy B on the shoulder; A > says "What did you do that for?" and B says "I was just brushing a chip [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > his shoulder." There need never have been a real chip: and if there > was, why did the custom die out? Sorry, your adding a "whack" and a mythical chip is not the true story. I'm on the road so I can't research things so easily, but I suspect there are half-a-dozen works of literature on line that would describe the true interchange (as described in the 1830 lines). As to implying a custom must never have existed if no one can explain why it died out, well... SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >>>> From the online OED: >>> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > explain > why it died out, well... "Go get the axe, there's a fly on Grannie's ear .. " A song I think I remember hearing in the late Forties or early Fifties. I dunno. It just seemed to fit. SignatureFrank ess >>>>> From the online OED: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >>> idiom, I offer a slightly more complex and speculative >>> folk-etymology of my own. >>> So here's my conjecture, FWIW. Boy A whacks boy B on the shoulder; A >>> says "What did you do that for?" and B says "I was just brushing a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I dunno. It just seemed to fit. Oh, yes. "Peeking through the knothole on Grandpa's wooden leg." I always assumed that the chip-on-the-shoulder thing originated on the frontier of the late 1700's or early 1800s, but that assumption is based on a film. I saw it enacted in "Abe Lincoln in Illinois", if I am not mistaken. My memory says it was when "Abe the rail-splitter" tried to avoid a fight by replying to the chip/shoulder challenge by daring the belligerent one to hold an axe at arm's length, a feat which Abe then demonstrated. But I may have two or three Lincoln stories mixed, and I certainly can't recall. Maybe it was Paul Bunyan and it was one of Babe's chips. > > > >From the online OED: > > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > was. I've seen it described in enough 19th century writing to have no > doubt it was an actual custom. That's what we need: contemporary accounts independent of one another; and only the full text of the 1830 article can tell us that author's intentions in writing it or his authority for doing so. And I want to know who puts the chip on the boy's shoulder: it's all in the passive voice. I see that the two boys are already, in the 1830 account, determined to fight anyway: so what's the ritual about? It's easy enough to devise an explanation of what's going on; but we haven't been given one. As I said, my speculation was provisional: I'll be glad to see the refs which knock out the proviso. [...] > > So here's my conjecture, FWIW. Boy A whacks boy B on the shoulder; A > > says "What did you do that for?" and B says "I was just brushing a chip [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > there are half-a-dozen works of literature on line that would describe > the true interchange (as described in the 1830 lines). Well, yes. But we do need to _see_ the true story if it's out there. The Lincoln incident could be telling; I once owned a copy of _From Log Cabin. . ._ but I never read it. > As to implying a custom must never have existed if no one can explain > why it died out, well... As I said, I was working from a hypothetical position that the 1830 quotation might turn out to be explanatory. If we found it represented a folk-etymology, then we _would_ need to question why the custom had already passed into legend by that date, or whether it had existed precisely as described. Folkways are often unreliably, even if confidently, attested. This one sounds strange to me, especially since I can't just now think of any close analogues. SignatureMike. >>>>> From the online OED: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > glad to see the refs which knock out the proviso. > [...] Amplified a little by M. Quinion: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-chi1.htm "It is American, first recorded in the Long Island Telegraph for 20 May 1830: "When two churlish boys were determined to fight, a chip would be placed on the shoulder of one, and the other demanded to knock it off at his peril". The same idea is mentioned in the issue of The Onondaga Standard of Syracuse, New York, for 8 December the same year: "'He waylay me,' said I, 'the mean sneaking fellow-I am only afraid that he will sue me for damages. Oh! if I only could get him to knock a chip off my shoulder, and so get round the law, I would give him one of the soundest thrashings he ever had.'" " SignatureJohn Dean Oxford >> > > >From the online OED: >> > > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > haven't been given one. As I said, my speculation was provisional: > I'll be glad to see the refs which knock out the proviso. It's always been pretty clear to me that the one making the dare is the one who puts the chip on his own shoulder. The closest I can get to an explicit statement of this from a nineteenth century source is If a minister will keep himself familiar with the profoundest works on Logic and Psychology, familiar with theological treatises like those of Calvin, and Zwingle, and Melanethon, and Cudworth, and Julius Müller, and Dorner, familiar with the idioms and genius of the Hebrew language and peculiarities of the Aramæan Greek, he will have as little inclination as he will find time to stand at the corners of the streets, and put a chip on his shoulder, and keep his fist clenched for a fight. Edwards A. Parks, "What is the Aim of a Theological Education", _The National Preacher_, October, 1865. This brings up a point that I haven't seen raised here yet. Namely, that while the ritual was a specific incident, in which one person challenged another or a group, to say that someone "has a chip on his shoulder" means that he's permanently in that state, always looking for a fight. As in The speaker spoke of our foreign policy, and while he did not admire the snarlishness of young Jonathan that made him place a chip on his shoulder and dare the world to knock it of [sic], he was in favor of a policy that, while it would submit to nothing wrong would give justice to all. _Brooklyn Daily Eagle_, 12/19/1856 To and fro over the continent moves Father Hecker, defiantly balancing upon his shoulder the fateful chip, which any careless jostle may throw down. The conflict is imminent. _Putnam's Magazine_, January, 1869 This man was Theodore Parker, a born controversialist, who had the challenging chip always on his shoulder, which he invited both his Unitarian and his orthodox brethren to knock off. There never was a man who more gloried in a fight. _The First Century of the Republic_, 1876 The earliest mention I can find is from 1835, but the author takes the ritual (whatever it might have been) for granted and uses it to explain a similar custom: I must not forget to tell you that the only vestige of ancient chivalry I have seen in all Virginia, occurred at Martinsburg. The day being warm, we were sitting, probably to the number of twenty, on benches, at the shady side of the hotel, fronting on one of the principal streets, when a man rode furiously by on horseback, and swore "he'd be d----d if he could not _lick_ any man who dared to crook his elbow at him." This, it seems, is equivalent to throwing the glove in days of yore, or to the boyish custom of knocking a chip off the shoulder... James Paulding, _Letters from the South_, 1835 SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |When all else fails, give the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |customer what they ask for. This Palo Alto, CA 94304 |is strong medicine and rarely needs |to be repeated. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ [snip] > It's always been pretty clear to me that the one making the dare is > the one who puts the chip on his own shoulder. The closest I can get > to an explicit statement of this from a nineteenth century source is [snip] Another bit of fine researching -- well done! A thought that occurred to me was the possible linkage of this defiance custom and the expression, "put up or shut up." Possibly, the latter was telling someone to put up a chip on their shoulder, or shut up -- but this is wild conjecturing without some shred of evidence. Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Another bit of fine researching -- well done! I was going to say the same thing. Those quotes were pretty convincing, and reminded me that when I was a lot younger, the expression was usually "he's got a permanent chip on his shoulder" or some variation on "permanent", like "always". Today, we seem to have removed that aspect, which is probably why the saying appears more mystifying than it actually is. SignatureRob Bannister > >> > > >From the online OED: > >> > > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > It's always been pretty clear to me that the one making the dare is > the one who puts the chip on his own shoulder. So we assume, given the later references. The 1830 quotation may just be rather poor writing (I do wish people weren't so fond of the passive voice); but if it isn't, then something else is going on. I want to be clear that I'm merely speculating; but that quotation, in isolation, is consistent with more than one interpretation. That, in part, is why I wonder if it's a garbled account, or only a guess, or partial guess, at the origin of an expression which was as baffling in 1830 as it is now. > The closest I can get > to an explicit statement of this from a nineteenth century source is [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Edwards A. Parks, "What is the Aim of a Theological > Education", _The National Preacher_, October, 1865. > This brings up a point that I haven't seen raised here yet. Namely, > that while the ritual was a specific incident, in which one person [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > _Brooklyn Daily Eagle_, 12/19/1856 [...] That's why I suggested some sort of evolution in the idiom when I first raised my doubts. The evidence we have so far is pretty spongy. I wouldn't suggest that these writers may well have followed a tradition uncritically (as writers often enough do) if I hadn't found the earliest reference we have a little puzzling. > The earliest mention I can find is from 1835, but the author takes the > ritual (whatever it might have been) for granted and uses it to > explain a similar custom: [...] I'm querying the taking for granted, of course. Taken for granted because everybody knew about it, or only because everybody knew that somebody had said it? (I'm searching my memory for similar cases; I know they abound, but all I can think of just now is the oft- repeated literary belief that burning apple logs smell particularly nice. Well, I tried it once, and in my single experience they smell particularly disgusting.) SignatureMike. >> >> > > >From the online OED: >> >> > > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > partial guess, at the origin of an expression which was as baffling > in 1830 as it is now. I'm not sure what would convince you, short, perhaps, of a diary entry. And even that might be problemmatic. By 1856 >> The speaker spoke of our foreign policy, and while he did not >> admire the snarlishness of young Jonathan that made him place a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >> _Brooklyn Daily Eagle_, 12/19/1856 people clearly had the notion that it was the one making the dare who put the chip on his shoulder. In 1830 and 1835, two different authors were confident that people were familiar with the ritual, but if by then it had already been subject to folk etymology then you could make the argument that boys were putting chips on their shoulders in immitation of the (misunderstood) saying. > That's why I suggested some sort of evolution in the idiom when I first > raised my doubts. The evidence we have so far is pretty spongy. I > wouldn't suggest that these writers may well have followed a tradition > uncritically (as writers often enough do) if I hadn't found the > earliest reference we have a little puzzling. That's because the earliest references assumed that the practice was common and known to the readers. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |There is something fascinating 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |about science. One gets such Palo Alto, CA 94304 |wholesale returns of conjecture out |of such a trifling investment of kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |fact. (650)857-7572 | Mark Twain http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ [...] > >> It's always been pretty clear to me that the one making the dare is > >> the one who puts the chip on his own shoulder. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm not sure what would convince you, short, perhaps, of a diary > entry. I'm in grave peril of making a mountain out of a molehill here. I'd happily buy a suitable diary entry: we haven't yet got a single literal account of the type "Joe put a chip on his shoulder and Jack knocked it off to start a fight". But, as I said at the git-go, seeing the full 1830 text would probably remove my suspicions. > And even that might be problemmatic. By 1856 > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > That's because the earliest references assumed that the practice was > common and known to the readers. Again, I really don't want to make a mountain out of what may not even be a molehill. It's just that it seems a bizarre custom, and assuming a practice is known to one's readers isn't the same as knowing it for oneself. Writers can be a flaky crowd, and "urban" myths can pick up a lot of momentum in a very short time. You try and convince people in Britain that the City of Birmingham didn't actually replace Christmas with something called "Winterval". SignatureMike. > Again, I really don't want to make a mountain out of what may not even > be a molehill. It's just that it seems a bizarre custom, No more so than "throwing down the gauntlet" or drawing a line in the sand. It's actually a rather nice protocol for issuing a public challenge. Pieces of wood being, presumably, readily at hand, the one issuing the challenge is unambiguously doing so (since there'd be no other reason to put a chip on his shoulder) and the one knocking it off is publicly and clearly accepting the challenge (or, equally clearly, refusing it), since there would be no reason to walk over to someone and knock something off their shoulder. Thus when the fight started, witnesses could all be sure that it was agreed to by both parties. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Of course, over the first 10^-10 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |seconds and 10^-30 cubic Palo Alto, CA 94304 |centimeters it averages out to |zero, but when you look in kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |detail.... (650)857-7572 | Philip Morrison http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > > Again, I really don't want to make a mountain out of what may not even > > be a molehill. It's just that it seems a bizarre custom, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > started, witnesses could all be sure that it was agreed to by both > parties. No doubt. But ordinary fights, even if premeditated, rarely seem to start in such ritualised ways, so I'd still like to see a description of it actually happening: and the search doesn't look promising, in spite of your impressive findings. SignatureMike. >> > Again, I really don't want to make a mountain out of what may not >> > even be a molehill. It's just that it seems a bizarre custom, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > No doubt. But ordinary fights, even if premeditated, rarely seem to > start in such ritualised ways, In my experience they do, even if the challenge is only a verbal "Say that again" or "Come over here and say that". I haven't seen the chip on the shoulder (nor, for that matter, throwing down a glove), but I have seen kids draw a line in the dirt and dare others to cross it. > so I'd still like to see a description of it actually happening: and > the search doesn't look promising, in spite of your impressive > findings. I'm a bit confused as to what you're questioning. Is it that the ritual occurred or that it was the source of (and not based on) the saying? I would have thought that there was sufficient evidence, at least in fictional reminiscences and biographies that the ritual did, indeed, exist. For example, in John Fitzgerald's autobiographical children's book _The Great Brain_, set in 1896 Utah, Tom bent over and picked up a piece of wood which he placed on his shoulder. "You are going to have to fight me," he said, daring Sammy to knock the chip of wood off and start a fight. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It's not coherent, it's merely 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |focused. Palo Alto, CA 94304 | Keith Moore kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> > Again, I really don't want to make a mountain out of what may not >>> > even be a molehill. It's just that it seems a bizarre custom, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >on the shoulder (nor, for that matter, throwing down a glove), but I >have seen kids draw a line in the dirt and dare others to cross it. That reminds me of the fight in "The Searchers" where Wayne and Jeffrey Hunter return from one of their trips to find the latter's girlfriend about to marry someone else. Before starting, one of them places a log of wood on the floor and the other has to step over it to start the fight. SignatureRobin Herts, England [...] > > No doubt. But ordinary fights, even if premeditated, rarely seem to > > start in such ritualised ways, > > In my experience they do, even if the challenge is only a verbal "Say > that again" or "Come over here and say that". That really feels different to me. I think because it's a fairly ordinary use of language, not a ritual folkway using material objects. > I haven't seen the chip > on the shoulder (nor, for that matter, throwing down a glove), but I [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ritual occurred or that it was the source of (and not based on) the > saying? As I keep saying, I didn't want to make a mountain out of a molehill. I just didn't feel comfortable with OED's out-of-context 1830 quotation, and wondered if it was a description or an explanation. If the latter, I further wondered if it might be a folk etymology for the saying. If the ritual had never actually existed, then it couldn't have been the source of the saying. > I would have thought that there was sufficient evidence, at > least in fictional reminiscences and biographies that the ritual did, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > shoulder. "You are going to have to fight me," he said, daring > Sammy to knock the chip of wood off and start a fight. At last! Unless that's been quoted before, it's the first actual example we've seen in this thread: that it's autobiographical makes it all the more useful. That, as I also said, is the kind of thing I needed to convince me that the explanation was genuine. All the other examples have been metaphorical uses of the expression, and therefore consistent with the explanation being a mere myth. Phew! SignatureMike. > [...] >> > No doubt. But ordinary fights, even if premeditated, rarely seem [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > ordinary use of language, not a ritual folkway using material > objects. I'd say that it's precisely the same thing. It's not an "ordinary use of language" to instruct someone to move toward you and repeat something so that you will feel justified in starting a fight. It's an ritualized and understood challenge, laying out the terms by which the one challenged can publicly demonstrate that he accepts or refuses the challenge. Some of these are verbal, others physical. Knights did, as I understand it, really throw down their gauntlets in challenge. Boys really did (and do) draw lines in the dirt. That putting a chip on your shoulder makes such a good challenge and is such an otherwise silly thing to do make it, to my mind, all the more likely that this was the origin of the phrase. >> I'm a bit confused as to what you're questioning. Is it that the >> ritual occurred or that it was the source of (and not based on) the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > etymology for the saying. If the ritual had never actually existed, > then it couldn't have been the source of the saying. But by the 1835 quotation I dug up (repeated below), just five years later, the practice was being used to *explain* another, assumed unfamiliar custom. Crooking one's elbow was like throwing down a glove or knocking a chip off the shoulder. This is 20 years before we start seeing metaphorical uses of people going around with chips on their shoulders. >> I would have thought that there was sufficient evidence, at >> least in fictional reminiscences and biographies that the ritual did, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > needed to convince me that the explanation was genuine. All the other > examples have been metaphorical uses of the expression, Except for my 1835 quote: I must not forget to tell you that the only vestige of ancient chivalry I have seen in all Virginia, occurred at Martinsburg. The day being warm, we were sitting, probably to the number of twenty, on benches, at the shady side of the hotel, fronting on one of the principal streets, when a man rode furiously by on horseback, and swore "he'd be d----d if he could not _lick_ any man who dared to crook his elbow at him." This, it seems, is equivalent to throwing the glove in days of yore, or to the boyish custom of knocking a chip off the shoulder... James Paulding, _Letters from the South_, 1835 > and therefore consistent with the explanation being a mere myth. But, to play devil's advocate, even if taken at face value, all this shows is that 40 (or perhaps 60) years after adults used the phrase, explaining that this is something that kids do, some kids actually did it. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Politicians are like compost--they 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |should be turned often or they start Palo Alto, CA 94304 |to smell bad. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ [...] > But, to play devil's advocate, even if taken at face value, all this > shows is that 40 (or perhaps 60) years after adults used the phrase, > explaining that this is something that kids do, some kids actually did > it. I thought _I_ was doing the Devil's advocate job here. Even so, I wasn't prepared to advance that idea, though it had crossed my mind. SignatureMike. > > I would have thought that there was sufficient evidence, at > > least in fictional reminiscences and biographies that the ritual did, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Phew! You didn't look for solid evidence yourself, did you? A Google search on "placed a chip on his shoulder" turns up two vivid portrayals of the literal custom. http://www.mootgame.com/misc/ragged_edges.html Life on the Ragged Edges: A Memoir by James Arthur Steeves (1908-1985) Published posthumously 1999 [Boyhood was in New Brunswick] After that I headed for school; it was about a half a mile from home. When I got there, I saw a large crowd of boys outside the side entrance of Edith Cavel. A friend of mine stepped out of this crowd and approached me. He said, "The bully-boy is telling all the others what he is going to do to you." I had forgotten about Sunday's argument, but I guess I must have been as eager as he was for a showdown, because I quickly pushed my way through his supporters and faced him. One of his chums placed a chip on his shoulder for me to knock off. As I reached forward to tap it off his shoulder, he slugged me, blackening my right eye and knocking me to the ground - I never let that trick fool me again. He had hit me really hard. [Snip blow-by-blow description of remainder of fight.] And: http://docsouth.unc.edu/southlit/dixon/dixon.html The Traitor: A Story of the Fall of the Invisible Empire: Dixon, Thomas, 1864-1946 New York, Doubleday, Page & Company, 1907 John Graham sprang to his feet with a muttered oath of surprise in time to see Billy square himself in front of the speaker and say: "If you think the Southern people a race of cowards and dastards come down off that platform and knock this chip off my shoulder, you old white-livered cur!" He placed a chip on his shoulder and strutted before Larkin. The Carpetbagger was too astonished to reply. He gazed at the boy in confusion and muttered an inarticulate protest. Billy jumped on the platform and walked around him like a game bantam, crying: "Knock it off--d----you! knock it off! If you want to test it! A dozen of my friends are out there, yours all around you, a hundred to one, but knock it off! knock it off!" John Graham had reached the platform by this time, seized Billy and led him back through the crowd to Mrs. Wilson who was in hysterics, the boys vainly trying to quiet her. These stories are exactly what I assured you a few days ago could be easily found in US literature. (One hit I found implied it was an Irish custom as well.) Among other results I found, I will mention here only that the respected American Dialect Society put in its journal: Dialect Notes ... - Page 177 by American Dialect Society - 1896 chip on one's shoulder. One who seeks a quarrel is said to go about with a chip on his shoulder, daring others to knock it off. [1840- 1901.] 1860 Let a boy at school put a chip on his head, and ell another that he must not knock it off, and he will be sure to do it. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux [...] > > all the more useful. That, as I also said, is the kind of thing I > > needed to convince me that the explanation was genuine. All the other [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "placed a chip on his shoulder" turns up two vivid portrayals of the > literal custom. No, I didn't. Next question? [...] > These stories are exactly what I assured you a few days ago could be > easily found in US literature. [...] Yes, and I hoped you would produce them, which you did. Thank you. SignatureMike. ... > I see that the two boys are already, in the 1830 account, > determined to fight anyway: so what's the ritual about? ... Determined to fight is one thing; hitting someone who might hit you back is another. I think the boy needs the ritual to get his nerve up and give his opponent a chance to back down, which would be the best possible outcome. See the fight scene in /Tom Sawyer/, complete with drawing a line in the dust. Unlike Tony Cooper, I never saw the line-drawing bit, which was given more publicity by the late Saddam Hussein. The few [*] fights I got into and the only somewhat more I saw never started with these rituals; they started when somebody lost his temper and attacked somebody else. It seemed that if two boys got to the point of challenging each other (say, standing on tiptoe with their chests touching), they would cool off enough that the fight wouldn't happen. I gather other times and places are different, though. Heck, there have been times and places when grown men could fight a duel to the death in cold blood. [*] Few non-fraternal, that is. SignatureJerry Friedman > ... >> I see that the two boys are already, in the 1830 account, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > places are different, though. Heck, there have been times and places > when grown men could fight a duel to the death in cold blood. Don't you think that all of these rituals need an audience? That is, the contestants need witnesses as to who starts the fight, who fights fair, who wins, and who brags about it to the rest of the playground or neighborhood community. Besides, the ritual gives time for the contestants' supporters to gather round as cheering sections, ready to join in at the slightest provocation. Two individuals in an isolated place wouldn't need the rituals, though one or the other might have some concept of gentlemanly behavior, chivalry, Marquis of Queensbury rules. That would probably be the loser. > "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit argumentative > and grumpy". > > What is a 'chip', and why is it on someone's shoulder? A wood chip would be placed on a shoulder. The wearer would dare one to knock it off after wich a fight would ensue. >> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit >argumentative [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >A wood chip would be placed on a shoulder. The wearer would dare one to >knock it off after wich a fight would ensue. From the old block, not the silicon kind, nor used in casinos, nor a rupee, nor what you eat with fish. >> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit > argumentative [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > A wood chip would be placed on a shoulder. The wearer would dare one to > knock it off after wich a fight would ensue. I always thought it was the 'underdog', that is, the sawyer standing under the log in a pit saw, who had the chips on his shoulder. But I could be very, very, wrong. Stupot > >> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit > > argumentative [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Stupot And you are. Someone said to have a chip on their shoulder is someone thought to be belligerent or quick to take offense. Ray O'Hara wrote, in <05ednfhWx6YqHQrYnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@comcast.com> on Sun, 31 Dec 2006 04:19:55 -0500: > > >> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit > > > argumentative [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > And you are. Someone said to have a chip on their shoulder is someone > thought to be belligerent or quick to take offense. A memory from the 1960s, possibly from a book review in The Observer: ... a chip on his shoulder (this is the badge by which the Earls Court Australians recognise one another) ... SignatureNick Spalding >> >> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit >> > argumentative [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >And you are. Someone said to have a chip on their shoulder is someone >thought to be belligerent or quick to take offense. In my experience it's more specific than that. (Perhaps the phtase is used with a wider meaning elsewhere.) A meaning with which I'm familiar is given in the _Longman Dictionary of English Idioms_: chip on one's/the shoulder (coll) a feeling of anger or bitterness because one thinks that one is regarded by others of little value or worth. The phrase is also used to describe a gnawing sense of grievance about something that happened in the past and which cannot be undone, and for which no one today can be held responsible, and certainly not those known to the "chip-bearer". These feelings can, and do, lead to belligerence. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit >>>>> argumentative and grumpy". [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > These feelings can, and do, lead to belligerence. When I was ten or so my father explained and demonstrared the practice current in his world at age ten (1921): when there was festering enmity between two members of the cohort, whichever figured he had the wherewithal to win a scuffle would find an actual wood chip (plenty around in wood-burning rural Utah), balance it on his shoulder and challenge the other party to knock it off. If he had the gumption to do so, the chip-tipper would, and the fight ensued. Pecking order established, the boys would be tight friends thereafter. I understood this to be a real and not infrequent occurrence. Never saw such a thing in my own life. So far. SignatureFrank ess >>>>>> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit >>>>>> argumentative and grumpy". [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] >I understood this to be a real and not infrequent occurrence. Never >saw such a thing in my own life. So far. A bit like the 'tread on the tail of me coat' in Ireland. That evening we met by the woodbine The Shannon we crossed in the dark And I paddled him with my shillelagh For he trod on the tail of me coat. >When I was ten or so my father explained and demonstrared the practice >current in his world at age ten (1921): when there was festering [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I understood this to be a real and not infrequent occurrence. Never >saw such a thing in my own life. So far. I've never seen the wood chip invitation to wrassle, but drawing a line in the dirt with a toe was actually done. Sometimes multiple lines were drawn when the toe-dragger didn't really expect the first line to be crossed. Or the second. SignatureTony Cooper Orlando, FL On 01 Jan 2007, Tony Cooper wrote > I've never seen the wood chip invitation to wrassle, but drawing > a line in the dirt with a toe was actually done. Sometimes > multiple lines were drawn when the toe-dragger didn't really > expect the first line to be crossed. Or the second. Ah yes: when Bugs gets Yosemite Sam to cross multiple lines and then step into mid-air... SignatureCheers, Harvey Canadian and British English, indiscriminately mixed For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van >>>> "He's got a chip on his shoulder" means, I think, "He's a bit >>> argumentative [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > And you are. Someone said to have a chip on their shoulder is someone > thought to be belligerent or quick to take offense. I know that. Sorry, I should have clarified. The 'chip-on-shoulder' attitude is a carry-over from the underdog, who was always pissed that he was having sawdust raining down on him. Stupot |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.