Re: stocking/stockinged feet
- From: Mike Lyle <mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:49:38 -0700
On 31 Jul, 16:47, John O'Flaherty <quias...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 31, 7:03 am, "Philip Eden" <philipATweatherHYPHENukDOTcom>
wrote:
I went out into the garden early this dry and sunny morning with no
shoes on, only to discover there'd been a heavy dew overnight. Very
uncomfortable.
The usual way of describing such an activity is (for me, at least)
"in my stockinged feet", which suddenly struck my British ear as an
anachronism since men in the UK don't (often) wear stockings.
Yet "in my socked feet" is clearly unidiomatic.
Checking my desk dictionary (Collins) revealed a reference
only to "stocking feet" and google gives about 4:1 stocking:stockinged.
I know we've visited the dropping of the "d" in these circumstances
many times before, but I have to admit that "stocking feet" sounds
decidedly odd to me. Perhaps I just need to get out more.
Most people with shoes on are stockinged, too. Anyway, the idiom "in
my stockinged feet" doesn't make sense. You can't be in your feet. "In
my socks (or stockings)" would be simpler. And it would be more direct
to say "unshod".
I'm for "in my socks", as I said earlier. But, coming back to the
original problem, "in my stocking-feet" may actually be the better
expression: it emphasises which bit of the stocking is exposed,
whether to view or to inappropriate conditions. On this analysis, I
think the hyphen is "desirable though not essential", as my school
clothes list used to say. "In my sock-feet" sounds even sillier.
--
Mike.
.
- References:
- stocking/stockinged feet
- From: Philip Eden
- Re: stocking/stockinged feet
- From: John O'Flaherty
- stocking/stockinged feet
- Prev by Date: Re: English Names of Italian Towns
- Next by Date: Re: Victorian boink?
- Previous by thread: Re: stocking/stockinged feet
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
