Talk:mox nix

RFV discussion: July 2012

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

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

---

mox nix

No wonder this was on Urban Dictionary but not here. I can't cite it with bgc, and I might be able to with ggc, but it looks like every use is intertwined with a mention, and it's hard to tell if those count. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I suspect this is from Yiddish, rather than German, and it might be just used in English as quoted Yiddish. I don't have any Yiddish references to check, though. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how you'd tell, although it was obviously in currency to use macht nichts in German for a while. BTW this is a followup to WT:ES#maski. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I found and added three cites on b.g.c., so I guess this can be struck. As to whether it originates with German or Yiddish, Eric Partridge's Dictionary of Catch Phrases says it originated with American G.I.s stationed in Germany after WWII (and indeed one of the cites is a letter from an American G.I. stationed in Germany after WWII), which strongly suggests German rather than Yiddish. —Angr 19:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is from German, not Yiddish. It is (or was, at least during the latter half of the 20th century) very common in the normal speech of American military members who had been stationed in Germany. Rarely written, though. —Stephen ^(Talk) 19:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

(after second edit conflict) Well, macht nichts is very basic, common German, so that's not a factor. I was just thinking that Yiddish is a much more productive conduit for such terms to enter English. I'm also wondering if the origin is from "macht es nichts" (contracted to "macht's nichts"), which has the subject and verb inverted like you would expect in various clauses, but might be idiomatically used as a variant of "es macht nichts". I should add that Angr's information sounds pretty persuasive (and Stephen's, too). Chuck Entz (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

@Angr: I'd say that the first cite (the WWII one) actually supports a new sense/POS, because it looks like an adjective there to me ("of no importance"). If you agree, that would leave only two cites, and two more to be found for the adjectival sense. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

It might be use of a phrase along the lines of: "good-bye stress, hello vacation". That is, using the imagined utterance as a whole almost as a symbol rather than as a part of speech. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

At any rate, I've added an adjective meaning and some more cites. There are now four for the interjection and three for the adjective, including one using the alternative spelling "mox-nix" with a hyphen. —Angr 19:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks! I must be very bad at citing things... --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:13, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

So is this now sufficiently cited that it can be struck and the RFV tag removed? —Angr 06:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course. I only didn't do it because I was criticized for doing it too soon once, and that seems subjective to me, so I don't wish to incur others' wrath. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 07:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

It looks cited to me. DCDuring TALK 13:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Good. I'm striking it here and removing the tag. —Angr 15:53, 26 July 2012 (UTC)