<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flummoxed, Flabbergasted and Gobsmacked</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.word-detective.com/2010/11/flummoxed-flabbergasted-and-gobsmacked/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.word-detective.com/2010/11/flummoxed-flabbergasted-and-gobsmacked/</link>
	<description>Semper Ubi Sub Ubi</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 19:32:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ST-EMM</title>
		<link>http://www.word-detective.com/2010/11/flummoxed-flabbergasted-and-gobsmacked/comment-page-1/#comment-9272</link>
		<dc:creator>ST-EMM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 04:33:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.word-detective.com/?p=4245#comment-9272</guid>
		<description>Interesting, then, that the first discovered written use of a word can lag way behind the actual use. Gobsmacked was a word being used in my social circle (possibly &quot;social&quot; isn&#039;t quite the word to use here, but that&#039;s another story) in the mid-seventies in Australia, and my father used the term prior to that on occasion. That is not the result of memory lapse either, but fact.

A colleague, a Sydney University English graduate, remembers it from school in the late 1960s. His memory of it just about squares with mine, and we&#039;ve both worked in the same office and in the same business - on and off - for the past 35 years or so.

I get the feeling sometimes that too much might be attached to the first discovery a term or word in print and that some slack should be applied if using it as a yardstick. Obviously it is important but it still gives an approximation at best.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Interesting, then, that the first discovered written use of a word can lag way behind the actual use. Gobsmacked was a word being used in my social circle (possibly &#8220;social&#8221; isn&#8217;t quite the word to use here, but that&#8217;s another story) in the mid-seventies in Australia, and my father used the term prior to that on occasion. That is not the result of memory lapse either, but fact.</p>
<p>A colleague, a Sydney University English graduate, remembers it from school in the late 1960s. His memory of it just about squares with mine, and we&#8217;ve both worked in the same office and in the same business &#8211; on and off &#8211; for the past 35 years or so.</p>
<p>I get the feeling sometimes that too much might be attached to the first discovery a term or word in print and that some slack should be applied if using it as a yardstick. Obviously it is important but it still gives an approximation at best.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Link love: language (24) &#171; Sentence first</title>
		<link>http://www.word-detective.com/2010/11/flummoxed-flabbergasted-and-gobsmacked/comment-page-1/#comment-8499</link>
		<dc:creator>Link love: language (24) &#171; Sentence first</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:03:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.word-detective.com/?p=4245#comment-8499</guid>
		<description>[...] flabbergasted and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->[...] flabbergasted and [...]<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.190 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-03-21 04:07:15 -->