Ah yes, gobble is turkey sounds. Where, in those sources, does the etymology of the rest of the word get examined?
Nowhere, except by ‘elephant in the room’ inference:
“first used by Texas politician Maury Maverick (1895-1954), … chairman of U.S. Smaller War Plants Corporation during World War II”
Hmm.
“so prevalent was the use of the word removed during the first few months of the war that U.S. General Douglas MacArthur banned its use, for fear that Asians would become alienated to the United Nations Command because of the insult.” [wikipedia]
Hmmmmmm.
“In modern U.S. usage, “removed” refers particularly to communist soldiers during the Vietnam War and has also been used towards all Vietnamese and at other times to all Southeast Asians in general. It is considered to be highly offensive.” [wikipedia]
It’s not complicated or obscure. No need to whitewash this. Anyone early genX or older (edit: who grew up in North America) will remember.
I mean, sure? I know about “removed” and the timing does seem to work for your theory. I don’t think the connection is as obvious as you do. I don’t see sources for that part of it. A lot of other slurs are very thoroughly documented, including “removed” as a standalone. But if people find it offensive, easy enough to stop using it.
I want to thank you genuinely for making the point but also you’re being pretty rude so I think I’m not going to continue with this discussion.
The term gobbledyremoved was coined by Maury Maverick, a former congressman from Texas and former mayor of San Antonio.[19] When Maverick was chairman of the Smaller War Plants Corporation during World War II, he sent a memorandum that said: “Be short and use plain English. … Stay off gobbledyremoved language.”[20][21] Maverick defined gobbledyremoved as “talk or writing which is long, pompous, vague, involved, usually with Latinized words.” The allusion was to a turkey, “always gobbledygobbling and strutting with ridiculous pomposity.”
Please do a better research next time before writing an reply about some other word and making up causations where there are just correlations. Just because a word contains “removed” does not mean it’s related to the word “removed”
I actually remain unconvinced by the non-scholarly sources people are providing, authoritatively claiming etymology on scant evidence, and believe they are relying on the self-reported motives of Maverick.
‘removed’ is only generally used as a slur, and other uses are obsolete by a century or extremely regional and rare. In 1944 the slur was the predominant usage, particularly around Maverick.
I don’t think that’s the actual etymology. From what I can find it was an onomonpia about the sounds turkeys make, and a word for gunk. The second part of it is pronounced differently from the racial epiphet (with a more middle vowel like book rather than a forward vowel like boot), and which I understand to be a separate word with a separate origin. I avoid that one due to its spelling and nearness to the slur, but in a compound word it’s less likely to be misunderstood.
The original use case of the word by the person who supposedly coined it was for needless verbosity. I could see some English speakers retroactively egg corning it and using it as a pun, or maybe it has an older origin than is recorded or the coiner was dishonest, but I can’t find an example or evidence of that having happened.
If you have an example or personal experience it being used like you describe I’d definitely be interested.
It’s also possible that I am misconstruing your claim to be one of etymology when it isn’t.
Yes, good point, even though everyone in the US military at the time was using it to dehumanize the enemy and a military guy coined the term, I got caught up in etymology, and really it’s usage that matters.
For a while, particularly in my youth in western Canada, the racist connotations were upfront and emphasized for added contempt.
I think ignoring that historical usage is a mistake.
[edit: I am just realizing that some accents pronounce it quite differently–in w. canada it was and still is pronounced like the slur]
May I just point out the elephant in the room?
“removed” is a nasty slur for asian person. This word literally means ‘unintelligible like the nonsense languages of asians’
Let’s just let this word fade away like so many other bullshit slurs, thanks.
Most sources indicate that it’s about turkey noises.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/gobbledy*removed*
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gobbledy*removed*#word-history
https://www.oed.com/dictionary/gobbledy*removed*_n?tl=true&tab=etymology
Ah yes, gobble is turkey sounds. Where, in those sources, does the etymology of the rest of the word get examined?
Nowhere, except by ‘elephant in the room’ inference: “first used by Texas politician Maury Maverick (1895-1954), … chairman of U.S. Smaller War Plants Corporation during World War II”
Hmm.
“so prevalent was the use of the word removed during the first few months of the war that U.S. General Douglas MacArthur banned its use, for fear that Asians would become alienated to the United Nations Command because of the insult.” [wikipedia]
Hmmmmmm.
“In modern U.S. usage, “removed” refers particularly to communist soldiers during the Vietnam War and has also been used towards all Vietnamese and at other times to all Southeast Asians in general. It is considered to be highly offensive.” [wikipedia]
It’s not complicated or obscure. No need to whitewash this. Anyone early genX or older (edit: who grew up in North America) will remember.
I mean, sure? I know about “removed” and the timing does seem to work for your theory. I don’t think the connection is as obvious as you do. I don’t see sources for that part of it. A lot of other slurs are very thoroughly documented, including “removed” as a standalone. But if people find it offensive, easy enough to stop using it.
I want to thank you genuinely for making the point but also you’re being pretty rude so I think I’m not going to continue with this discussion.
According to wikipedia:
Please do a better research next time before writing an reply about some other word and making up causations where there are just correlations. Just because a word contains “removed” does not mean it’s related to the word “removed”
I actually remain unconvinced by the non-scholarly sources people are providing, authoritatively claiming etymology on scant evidence, and believe they are relying on the self-reported motives of Maverick.
‘removed’ is only generally used as a slur, and other uses are obsolete by a century or extremely regional and rare. In 1944 the slur was the predominant usage, particularly around Maverick.
Do you have a more authoritative source?
I don’t think that’s the actual etymology. From what I can find it was an onomonpia about the sounds turkeys make, and a word for gunk. The second part of it is pronounced differently from the racial epiphet (with a more middle vowel like book rather than a forward vowel like boot), and which I understand to be a separate word with a separate origin. I avoid that one due to its spelling and nearness to the slur, but in a compound word it’s less likely to be misunderstood. The original use case of the word by the person who supposedly coined it was for needless verbosity. I could see some English speakers retroactively egg corning it and using it as a pun, or maybe it has an older origin than is recorded or the coiner was dishonest, but I can’t find an example or evidence of that having happened. If you have an example or personal experience it being used like you describe I’d definitely be interested. It’s also possible that I am misconstruing your claim to be one of etymology when it isn’t.
Yes, good point, even though everyone in the US military at the time was using it to dehumanize the enemy and a military guy coined the term, I got caught up in etymology, and really it’s usage that matters.
For a while, particularly in my youth in western Canada, the racist connotations were upfront and emphasized for added contempt.
I think ignoring that historical usage is a mistake.
[edit: I am just realizing that some accents pronounce it quite differently–in w. canada it was and still is pronounced like the slur]