Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald
Just because it's been used in print for fifty years doesn't make it correct. And your analogy is faulty.
|
Well, actually, it being used in print for 50 years is some of the best possible evidence that it is correct.
Care to explain the problem with my analogy? You can say "I don't give a rat's *ss," but you can also say "I could give a rat's *ss." Both mean the same thing.
This has been studied a little bit. Steven Pinker thinks that it is meant sarcastically. Some linguists think that it may have started sarcastically and then normalized. But the most interesting theory (to me) is that [could] + [expression indicating extreme lack of interest, usually scatological] carries some sort implicit negative meaning. (You can substitute a lot of four letter words for "rat's *ss") in the example above.