Talk:amuser

RFV discussion

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

amuser

RFV-sense "Rogues who carried snuff or dust in their pockets, which they threw into the eyes of any person they intended to rob; and running away, their accomplices (pretending to assist and pity the half-blinded person) took that opportunity of plundering him." - -sche (discuss) 07:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

This sense seems to be directly taken from Barrère and Leland's Dictionary of Slang, Jargon and Cant (1889, p.37 s.v. Amusers):

• Amusers (English and American), thieves, who formerly used to throw snuff or pepper in a victim's eyes, while an accomplice robbed him, under pretext of rendering assistance.

Farmer & Henley's Dictionary of Slang and Colloquial English (1927, p.10 s.v. Amuse) has:

• ... Whence amuser, a cheat a snuff-throwing thief; one that decieves. (Ash and Grose)

And Eric Partridge's Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (2013, ed Beale) has:

• amuse, in late C.17–18 c, is to throw dust, pepper, snuff, etc., in the eyes of the person to be robbed; an amuser is one who does this. B.E.

–Catsidhe ^{(verba, facta)} 08:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

It's a special usage of a general older sense. We've had this discussion before at amuse (see here). I've taken the liberty of replacing a specific usage in one work with the more general older sense of which that was a special case. Technically, this is almost covered by sense 1 since the most of the meaning is given at the amuse entry. I suppose we could add dozens of particular slang senses, but I think they are all covered by the older meaning. Dbfirs 11:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

...later ... Sorry, in my rush, I'd removed the template before allowing further discussion here. I've restored it as sense 3, but I suggest that this sense be deleted, or used as an example of sense 2. Francis Grose was a satirist, and seems to have introduced this specific meaning partly as a joke, though there's no doubt that the word was used to describe such thieves, and others who used similar techniques. Dbfirs 12:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I think it should stay, even if marked as obsolete or archaic. While the derivation from the primary sense of amuse to the specific one of someone who uses distraction as a cover for theft is obvious enough when shown, it's not necessarily clear without specific mention. It's clearly derived, but it's just as clearly specific and distinct. I would like this sense back in the entry for amuse as well, for the same reason. Even if as a subsense of one of the existing senses. —Catsidhe ^{(verba, facta)} 12:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

We could certainly extend the sense, or add the Francis Grose as a citation to illustrate usage. As I mentioned, I don't think Grose intended it as a serious definition, but others might have taken it to be so after 1785. Dbfirs 12:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the definition, Dbfirs. As for the "sandy" sense: as per usual RFV practice, it can stay iff there are words that use "amuser" with that sense, distinct from the general sense that's just been added. - -sche (discuss) 19:15, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• 1993, Stella Cameron; [Only by Your Touch] p.88

  "He should have knowed better than to tangle with you, Miss Lindsay. Where did you learn to be an amuser, then?"

• 2013, Michelle Lovric; [The Remedy]

  "Valentine watches the bunch of amusers close around the politician, the leader already dipping into his pocket for the snuff to fling into the eyes of their victim."

I did a search for anything likely in Google Books between 1750 and 1900, and found not a damn thing... as I suspect Dbfirs predicted. But the previous two cites show that even if no-one at the time used the term in anger (or at least, not in print), it is now used retroactively for period flavour. I even tripped over a mention of the term being used in the movie Gangs of New York. —Catsidhe ^{(verba, facta)} 10:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Francis Grose seems to have had more influence than I had expected. In view of your excellent research, I reverse my opinion and agree that we could have a third archaic slang sense. Dbfirs 13:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Seems we allow cites from durably archived non-written material, a Gangs of New York citation would be fully acceptable. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Quotes for Bill 'The Butcher' Cutting (Character) from Gangs of New York (2002)

Boss Tweed: I don't know. I think maybe we should hang someone.
Bill: Who?
Boss Tweed: No one important, necessarily. Average men will do. Back alley amusers with no affiliations.

Will that do? —Catsidhe ^{(verba, facta)} 08:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

It fits the general sense 2, and might, or might not, be intended in the Francis Grose sense. Dbfirs 09:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Passed. Citations added to the entry; since every cite is recent, I changed the label from obsolete to historical. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFC discussion: July 2011–May 2017

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

amuser

Tagged, not listed. Looks like an RFV might be in order. Equinox ◑ 10:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

• Looks awesome now --Celui qui crée ébauches de football anglais (talk) 12:12, 22 May 2017 (UTC)