 |
 | 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 / British English / July 2007'Niss' or 'Nis'
I encountered this word while watching a late sixties tv drama. It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you niss!'. The only word like that I can find refers to Swedish goblins of a friendly nature (or similar) which would not seem to fit. Is this a pre-existing word or simply one coined for the programme to avoid using a 'real' swear-word? (I was reminded of some silly science fiction programme that allegedly used such words to avoid the use of f... etc.)  SignatureBlue Sow > It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you niss!'. Are you sure they weren't calling the person Eunice, as in the cricketer Eunice Carne? > Is this a pre-existing word or simply one coined for the programme to > avoid using a 'real' swear-word? Was the program UK or US or even Australian? I've not heard the word in Britain. Paul Burke >> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you niss!'. > > Are you sure they weren't calling the person Eunice, as in the cricketer > Eunice Carne? It was used to refer to any number of individuals, all of whom were considered less wise, or less young, by the person saying it (and none of whom had the syllable as part of their name). >> Is this a pre-existing word or simply one coined for the programme to >> avoid using a 'real' swear-word? > > Was the program UK or US or even Australian? I've not heard the word in > Britain. The programme is British English and was broadcast in 1969. The character who uses the term is London English. Other characters are primarily London English with some Scottish (the actors are generally English). It was written by Robin Chapman (British). SignatureBlue Sow >>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you >>> niss!'. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > considered less wise, or less young, by the person saying it (and none > of whom had the syllable as part of their name). Possibly 'nit' or 'nits' (plural). From the OED: "2. colloq. Originally: an insignificant, inconsequential, or contemptible person. In later use chiefly: spec. a foolish, stupid, or incompetent person. Cf. LOUSE n. 2. In early use sometimes as a more general term of abuse. The later development in meaning may be influenced by NITWIT n." And on "nitwit": "A. n. A stupid, silly, or foolish person. Also in extended use as a term of abuse or derision. B. adj. (attrib.). Stupid, foolish, idiotic." >>>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you >>>> niss!'. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Possibly 'nit' or 'nits' (plural). Yes, I did consider that it might have been a variation of that as it would not have attracted the attention of the censors. Changing the word slightly did allow them to use it more forcefully than would have been possible with 'nit'. Whatever its origins, the term does not seem to have become popular as a result of it being featured in a remarkable television series. SignatureBlue Sow >>>>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you >>>>> niss!'. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Whatever its origins, the term does not seem to have become popular as a > result of it being featured in a remarkable television series. I was kind of assuming you'd misheard it, especially as you're listening to a 1960's recording. Why not let us all on to the secret of what program it is? Perhaps somebody will actually have access to the scripts... > I was kind of assuming you'd misheard it, especially as you're listening > to a 1960's recording. I gathered as much, but do not think so as it appears a number of times and the sound is generally quite good. > Why not let us all on to the secret of what program it is? Perhaps > somebody will actually have access to the scripts... It isn't a secret LOL The series is Big Breadwinner Hog. My enquiry was to ask if anyone could place the word prior to 1969. Access to the script will determine the spelling, but not its origins or earlier meaning, if it had one. SignatureBlue Sow > My enquiry was to ask if anyone could place the word prior to 1969. > Access to the script will determine the spelling, but not its origins or > earlier meaning, if it had one. I think the responses so far show that none of us can place it either prior to 1969, or indeed thereafter. I think the suggestion that it's a one- off usage of a made- up word, replacing one deemed unacceptable by the broadcaster, is most likely. In 1969, Mary Whitehouse was in full pomp. Paul Burke >> My enquiry was to ask if anyone could place the word prior to 1969. >> Access to the script will determine the spelling, but not its origins [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Paul Burke Or misheard, which makes finding the spelling relevant. >>> My enquiry was to ask if anyone could place the word prior to 1969. >>> Access to the script will determine the spelling, but not its [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Or misheard, which makes finding the spelling relevant. We did get Blue Sow to admit to seeing "The poor niss." in a script. SignatureJohn Briggs >>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you >>> niss!'. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > primarily London English with some Scottish (the actors are generally > English). It was written by Robin Chapman (British). Why not just tell us the name of the programme rather than forcing us to guess? SignatureJohn Briggs > > The programme is British English and was broadcast in 1969. The > > character who uses the term is London English. Other characters are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Why not just tell us the name of the programme rather than forcing us to > guess? Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Chapman suggests that it could be either "Spindoe" or "Big Breadwinner Hog", neither of which I have ever heard of (I was aged 11 or 12 at the time). Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Chapman suggests that it could > be either "Spindoe" or "Big Breadwinner Hog", neither of which I have ever > heard of (I was aged 11 or 12 at the time). Indeed (-: I have both (all in the same DVD set) but 'Niss' appears in 'Hog'. I was a little older and remember it well - except I lived in an area where it was quickly cancelled so much of it will be quite new to me. SignatureBlue Sow >> Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Chapman suggests that >> it could be either "Spindoe" or "Big Breadwinner Hog", neither of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I was a little older and remember it well - except I lived in an area > where it was quickly cancelled so much of it will be quite new to me. A little searching shows that the set contains PDF of original scripts - please confirm that you have checked those first. SignatureJohn Briggs > A little searching shows that the set contains PDF of original scripts - > please confirm that you have checked those first. Obviously, I have checked those that relate to the episodes which I have watched, bearing in mind the set of scripts is incomplete. In most cases, the word and the phrase in which it was uttered are not mentioned. There is no full script for the episode which contains my original quote of 'you niss!'. Certain handwritten documents are not in a hand that I can read. A direct quote from episode three however has 'The poor old niss.' when referring to someone he considers to be beneath him. That reference appears in the rehearsal script but not in the performance script. Both versions are not available for every episode. As stated elsewhere, the scripts would show spellings and I offered two options in the subject line. But this does not help with my enquiry into the origins, and meanings, of the word 'niss' or 'nis' unless as I suggested previously, it was a word devised to represent something akin to 'bastard' without the need to swear on television. That would seem overly squeamish given the acid incident in episode one. I am following up the suggestion by PD for the moment. SignatureBlue Sow > Why not just tell us the name of the programme rather than forcing us to > guess? Because the question is about the word and its meaning. I have given the programme name above which you were never asked (or forced) to guess. SignatureBlue Sow >>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you niss!'. >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >with some Scottish (the actors are generally English). >It was written by Robin Chapman (British). This suggestion might be something or nothing, but there is a word "nish": http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/n.htm nish Pron./Adv. Nothing. OED Online has it as a variant spelling of "nesh". "Niss" might derive from "nish" or "nesh", it might be a more recent local coining, or something else. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in uk.culture.language.english) >>>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you niss!'. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > "Niss" might derive from "nish" or "nesh", it might be a more recent > local coining, or something else. That looks quite promising and really helpful. Thank you so much. I shall follow that trail and see where it leads. SignatureBlue Sow > >>> It was used in the sense of calling someone a bad name as in 'you niss!'. > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > "Niss" might derive from "nish" or "nesh", it might be a more recent > local coining, or something else. If it means nothing then we are back to a contraction from German "nicht", ditto nix. I'm more intrigued by the possibilities that it could be derived from Hebrew "nisan", roughly corresponding to March and April which would imply "fool" (April Fool) as well as be consistent with the allegedly irrelevant musings concerned with anagrams and backwards spellings and suchlike which are I gather a feature of Kabbalah-ism. At the risk of being labelled a hopeless theist once again of course for making observations that encompass the root faith of the nominal religion all in the UK are assumed to be by various legal and administrative bodies unless they specifically state otherwise (i.e. CofE) and their shared concepts of bad, or taboo acts and good, or worthy, acts > -- > Peter Duncanson, UK > (in uk.culture.language.english)- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- > I encountered this word while watching a late sixties tv drama. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > science fiction programme that allegedly used such words to avoid the > use of f... etc.) Yes, it's most likely a nonce-word used instead of some other word that might have been judged unacceptable. In his novel "Myron" (a sequel to "Myra Breckinridge") Gore Vidal replaced rude words by the names of Supreme Court Justices - I think you can probably imagine what an enormous rehnquist is :-) SignatureJohn Briggs > > I encountered this word while watching a late sixties tv drama. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > -- > John Briggs Yes, I was wondering on reading this thread whether it may not be more akin to an Unwin than anything a Reading guttersnipe'd know. Spelled backwards it would be "sin", which, at that time could easily refer to both the original sin of Eve and also the sin of the sodomite--i.e. not just a bastard but a gay one at that. As such, I wouldn't rule-out some auctorial license of the "Clockwork Orange" type. It remains that those words with a resonant set of connotations work their ways through naff-ness filters, and those which contrive to represent this phenomenon often don't. It is a cliche, almost, to speak of one who "bats for the other side", yet one Received Preception of Hindu doctrine is bisexuality is normal (if undesirable), and "batty" has been common in some dialects for "daft" for years and "bats in the belfry" is idiomatic in Received Standard English. So, we end up with "Bhatti" as one allusion to homosexual males in current yoofspeek. None of it has aught to do with Eve, or the concept of "sin" either as a spiritual slur or a metaphor for disease/illness/bad Karma and whathaveyou. There'd still be scope for Marmite(TM) jokes if such factors mattered. And "nits" is just so tame. The year cited, for the original broadcast, being 1969, the urban legends of the Cockroach-Nest-BeeHive Hair-Dos would be common currency and I saw no reason for this to be children speaking, where headlice as the reason for pillorying would be playground fodder. Or am I mistaken there? If so, kidsTV shows always did use polite euphemisms instead of real language--and Mary Whitehouse was far, far, more concerned with whipping the porno back to manageable levels, before we turned into a bunch of perverts. Maybe she should've studied history as well as The Bible. G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- > Yes, I was wondering on reading this thread > whether it may not be more akin to an Unwin [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > sodomite--i.e. not just a bastard but a gay > one at that. According to the script, it is spelled 'niss', so spelled backwards, gives 'ssin'. The remainder of your comment assumes a belief in certain myths, or at least a belief in the possibility of 'sin'. It is most revealing that you assume that sodomites are born of unmarried parents. There is no mention of bastards as a topic of this thread. Perhaps you should consult a therapist concerning your own suppressed inclinations, and I do not possess suitable qualifications to suggest more than that. I doubt if you are in a position to know if the script writer held any of those beliefs; the character saying the word certainly did not. [snipped] The remainder of your post was merely irrelevant. SignatureBlue Sow > > Yes, I was wondering on reading this thread > > whether it may not be more akin to an Unwin [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > belief in the possibility of 'sin'. It is most revealing that you assume that > sodomites are born of unmarried parents. You're projecting. You're inferring what I didn't imply. And these kinds of values are entirely par for the course in such environments as Approved Schools, not that I ever attended one so much as have conversed with people who did and who've spent time in prison in different eras. The context which you gave was a '60s working class environment and the interpretation I offered says more about the possible values the author wished to convey than about mine. There is no mention of bastards as a > topic of this thread. > > Perhaps you should consult a therapist concerning your own suppressed > inclinations, and I do not possess suitable qualifications to suggest more than > that. Yet you've come back at me a few times with a strong Mental Health aspersion. If you don't have the qualifications then I suggest you don't bother worrying your imagination about trying to make analyses you're clearly not capable of making. > I doubt if you are in a position to know if the script writer held any of those > beliefs; the character saying the word certainly did not. I haven't seen the show, I haven't read the script. You excerpted. I offered options that nobody else had. You threw them back in my face. This says more about you than I ever would. > [snipped] > > The remainder of your post was merely irrelevant. > > Blue Sow G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- >>> Yes, I was wondering on reading this thread >>> whether it may not be more akin to an Unwin [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > You're projecting. You're inferring what > I didn't imply. If you think so. I agree you did not imply anything because what you wrote was explicit, not implicit. I had no need to infer. I think your 'original sin of adam and eve' and 'bastard but a gay one' are quite clear and require no projection by the reader. > The context which you gave was a '60s working > class environment and the interpretation I > offered says more about the possible values > the author wished to convey than about mine. Did I give that context? I hope not because it is not relevant. >> Perhaps you should consult a therapist concerning your own suppressed >> inclinations, and I do not possess suitable qualifications to suggest more than >> that. > > Yet you've come back at me a few times with a > strong Mental Health aspersion. There is no aspersion there, nor any reference to your mental health. I will admit to borrowing from Shakespeare, but doesn't everyone? >> I doubt if you are in a position to know if the script writer held any of those >> beliefs; the character saying the word certainly did not. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > face. This says more about you than I ever > would. Not really. Your frequent references to christian deities, non heterosexual persons, etc. say more than enough about you. I merely throw a club at your balls as you serve them. SignatureBlue Sow > >>> Yes, I was wondering on reading this thread > >>> whether it may not be more akin to an Unwin [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > >> According to the script, it is spelled 'niss', so spelled backwards, gives 'ssin'. I forget how many Nazi's it's claimed still live in Scotland under (false) Polish identities. It's rather more than a handful. > >> The remainder of your comment assumes a belief in certain myths, or at least a > >> belief in the possibility of 'sin'. It is most revealing that you assume that [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Did I give that context? > I hope not because it is not relevant. I thought it was. Evidently I was wrong. > >> Perhaps you should consult a therapist concerning your own suppressed > >> inclinations, and I do not possess suitable qualifications to suggest more than [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > There is no aspersion there, nor any reference to your mental health. Suppressed inclinations are not generally considered healthy was the gist of it, so far as I'm aware. > I will admit to borrowing from Shakespeare, but doesn't everyone? > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Your frequent references to christian deities, non heterosexual persons, etc. > say more than enough about you. I'm not convinced they say what you think, or that your disinclination to say what you think outside of stock put-downs that are essentially vague, as above, leads me to panic the way you want. They are also, in a breakdown of a documented linguistic change which has attracted comment in the cultural arena, both factors which do strongly contribute to the prevalence of the term "batty" in graffitti. It may not answer your question, but is hardly "irrelevant" in a broad sense as it's an insult which is now widely used I've seen it daubed a few places. As it seems more likely than not that the word you ask about was made-up, on balance, then how is any speculation about the author's intended connotations irrelevant? It wasn't uppermost in my mind at the time but there is also the widespread sniggering about the "Nuremburg position" (and accounts of it being practised) to consider. Although my own opinion is that the hardened single-s which one normally finds associate with "i" - "is", "'tis", "plausible", "Platonism" is widespread enough it was a dialogue-cue to avoid confusion. That would be consistent with ss-in Back to religion a moment. Hinduism, and Sikhism to a lesser extent, are congnisant of the range of human sexual preferences but even within those societies same sex activity is frowned upon. Despite whether or not any supposed deity, in any form, actually offered any teaching on the matter, those religions taking Judaism as their basis are far more likely to see same-sex acts as a "sin" than not. Their term not mine The CofE is perhaps the exception there, but it's not really, and is currently facing a schism with its African branch over the issue. This was more in the news at the time I first posted than it is right now. Yeah, I have an 'O' Level in the Life and Teachings of Jesus. That's as far as it goes. Except that what people believe, and why, interests me. This is not the same thing as a profession of belief. In terms of whether the word was meant to imply that on a phonological basis alone, albeit it was a meaning hardly subject to deep encryption in the case of a made-up word, unless the utterer had a marked South African accent (which I think you'd've mentioned), the spelling options seem limited and thus implcit. Surely made-up words themselves imply obscenity, or there would be no need to make them up? The Neighbours, and later Kath & Kim, staple: "Rack off!" for example--though I'm sure they're gone the whole hog and said "f.cking" in one episode I saw this last 6 months or so. Perhaps it is the Aussie equal to the British "Bog off" and is widespread in use. Otherwise it's another example of a made-up phrase that was coined to imply an obscene, and sexual, phrase in daily use but frowned up in broadcasting, and one which similarly hasn't passed into common usage. I merely throw a club at your balls as you > serve them. I give you Ogham's razor to use and you turn around and try to slash my face is more the way I see that one. 8?). > Blue Sow G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- > I give you Ogham's razor to use and you turn > around and try to slash my face is more the way > I see that one. 8?). Is Ogham's Razor to be found in Pluto's Republic? SignatureJohn Briggs >>> According to the script, it is spelled 'niss', so spelled backwards, gives 'ssin'. > > I forget how many Nazi's it's claimed still > live in Scotland under (false) Polish identities. > It's rather more than a handful. What, I wonder, does that have to do with the topic at hand? I neither know, nor care, if the claim is true or false. >>> The context which you gave was a '60s working >>> class environment and the interpretation I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I thought it was. Evidently I was wrong. Indeed so, but not to worry. >>> Yet you've come back at me a few times with a >>> strong Mental Health aspersion. >> There is no aspersion there, nor any reference to your mental health. > > Suppressed inclinations are not generally considered > healthy was the gist of it, so far as I'm aware. I suspect that would depend on the inclination. Suppressing the inclination to murder every thirty-third person to pass you in the street would perhaps be considered extremely healthy. Suppressing inclinations which are natural, and legal, may or may not be unhealthy but is almost certainly pointless. >> Your frequent references to christian deities, non heterosexual persons, etc. >> say more than enough about you. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > vague, as above, leads me to panic the way you > want. I am perfectly happy to say what I think on any topic on which I have some sort of opinion. Did you have a subject in mind? I doubt that I use 'stock put-downs' as I am not likely to know any. More importantly, I would not want you to panic. That you think I would is a little bizarre perhaps. > there is also the widespread sniggering about > the "Nuremburg position" (and accounts of it > being practised) to consider. Although my own [...] > "'tis", "plausible", "Platonism" is widespread > enough it was a dialogue-cue to avoid confusion. > That would be consistent with ss-in I am sure that you believe that. I am unable to see why. > Back to religion a moment. > Hinduism, and Sikhism to a lesser extent, are > congnisant of the range of human sexual preferences > but even within those societies same sex activity > is frowned upon. So? What has same sex activity to do with a late sixties crime drama? None is depicted in the drama. The persons who are called 'niss' which is anyone that the central character thinks is less intelligent than he (almost everyone) exhibit no characteristics which may be interpreted as being non-heterosexual. Quite the reverse. > Despite whether or not any supposed deity, in > any form, actually offered any teaching on the > matter, those religions taking Judaism as their > basis are far more likely to see same-sex acts > as a "sin" than not. Their term not mine Again, why oh why do you insist on introducing homosexuality into the discussion? > Except that what people believe, and why, interests > me. This is not the same thing as a profession > of belief. It interests me a great deal too, but you have not actually linked the question of religion or variations in sexual activity to the topic. > Surely made-up words themselves imply obscenity, > or there would be no need to make them up? In the present instance, it might have replaced 'bastard', which would not have been permitted on public television at the time. The question of whether 'bastard' is an obscenity is open to debate but it would have fitted the context. It is quite difficult to replace 'niss' with a single sexual swear-word throughout the series. One could take the view that 'niss' represents every known swear-word and replaces different words with each use. But again, that has nothing to do with gay sex or christians. > The Neighbours, and later Kath & Kim, staple: "Rack > off!" for example--though I'm sure they're gone the > whole hog and said "f.cking" in one episode I saw this > last 6 months or so. Perhaps it is the Aussie equal > to the British "Bog off" and is widespread in use. You may want to allow that the term may be an example of Australian English and not simply a substitute for what an English person would say. This is perhaps what you mean in your final sentence of the segment quoted above. I do not watch that type of programme so cannot comment beyond that. > Otherwise it's another example of a made-up phrase > that was coined to imply an obscene, and sexual, > phrase in daily use but frowned up in broadcasting, > and one which similarly hasn't passed into common > usage. This is the point at which we disagree. Your preoccupation with sexual matters is one you freely admitted previously. Why must every nonce word be sexual? Some certainly are of course, but I offered a word then considered 'obscene' in English ... bastard. It is not a sexual word. Nor does it imply that the unmarried parents, or children thereof, must have been gay. > I merely throw a club at your balls as you >> serve them. > > I give you Ogham's razor to use and you turn > around and try to slash my face is more the way > I see that one. 8?). To misquote a phrase, well you would say that, wouldn't you? SignatureBlue Sow <snip> Ah forget it. Freud was a falsifying liar. The word was used on any number of occasions in the script, you say, and were unclear on the spelling at first. Had it been "nuss" or "tuss" or "biss" I'd've said entirely different things. G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- > >>> According to the script, it is spelled 'niss', so spelled backwards, gives 'ssin'. > [quoted text clipped - 128 lines] > -- > Blue Sow > <snip> Ah forget it. Freud was a falsifying liar. The word was used on > any number of occasions in the script, you say, and were unclear on > the spelling at first. Had it been "nuss" or "tuss" or "biss" I'd've > said entirely different things. I suspect so. For 'nuss' you would have seen a sibilant anagram of 'sun' and bearing in mind that 'sun' is a homophone of 'son', and that the word 'homophone' already sounds 'gay', you would have arrived, after a few hundred words, at Elton John. Then you would have suggested that one of his famous songs actually used the word 'sun' as a replacement for 'son' when he sang about his love for that christian 'son' while begging 'don't let the son go down on me' as he did not wish to have on his conscience the fact that he had 'known' his saviour. Blue Sow, Impression: Sipston, Bognor Regis. SignatureBlue Sow (there is a little something in the town for you too) |
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.