Talk:Double entendre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Comedy (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.


Perhaps the Don McLean example should be explained. I didn't figure out the innocent meaning until I read it over again several times.

Easy enough, though explaining a joke of course ruins it. But then, we are not a joke collection. Amusingly enough, I've heard this title a hundred times without realizing it was a double entendre—I never got the racy meaning. How about that? JRM 01:49, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)

Arrested Development[edit]

I find the paragraph about AD particularly funny, considering the show also features Tobias whose most recognizable trait is his constant and unintentional double entendres. Not to mention the writer means it to be an example outside British context and still being about British/American English differences (and I'd say any Brit would understand the double meaning of the word in question). I would change the example to one of Tobias' double entendres but I don't have an exact quote and I don't mean to step on the writer's toes here.

Son of Boss - reference to tax evasion scheme or to the sibling created by BOSS[edit]

In the world of finance and taxation, "BOSS" is an acronym for "bond and option sales strategy" which is a tax scheme. The Son of BOSS is the common label used to describe iterations of BOSS by some. I suggest that it might in fact be a double entendre where the secondary, perhaps less flattering, would be a moniker for a person who popularizes the use of the BOSS strategies. In the Son of BOSS article, Mitt Romney has been cited as noted purveyor of BOSS techniques. So, My question, could or would, Son of BOSS be considered as a contender for a double entendre with a double meaning? Wikipietime (talk) 22:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Answer, I'm not sure, but there may be some technical term for when an acronym ITSELF, starts to convey a meaning, (in the Euro-zone, in recent years the most seriously indebted nations are frequently referred to by the acronym PIGS, Portugal, Ireland, Greece & Spain), the subliminal message is clear, but I'm not sure whether this makes it a double entendre.Pincrete (talk) 12:42, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

First picture[edit]

I believe the picture at the top with the quote "My sweet honey, I hope you are to be let with the Lodgins!" She: "No, sir, I am to be let alone."" is irrelevant because i googled the word Lodgins and found nothing relavent. :( I have no idea what Lodgins means and dont know how to fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

To "let" is to lease. The gentleman in the illustration is enquiring whether she is included with the lease, yet not directly implying so.. She says she wishes to be "let alone" which could also mean one of two things. Hence the double entendre. This is probably not a good example of double entendre, yet I thought I'd explain it because it wasn't obvious to me at first either. (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I understand that he's trying to determine if he's rented her with his payment for lodgings. Do you mean "let alone" as a double entendre of "to be free of harassment" and also "her price is not included with that of the room"?DILNN1 (talk) 05:29, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear, in case it isn't obvious lodgins=lodgings (furnished rented rooms, often with food and other services, should really be rendered 'lodgin's', to show he is mis-pronouncing it). His question COULD be rendered do I get a lovely girl like you to look after my needs if I rent here? … … her response is rather more 'knowing', mindful perhaps of her being only too aware of how an elderly gentleman might interpret looking after his needs, the drawing suggests that she is probably right, though there is a second meaning in her reply I hope that I am to be paid extra for whatever I might do for you. The ambiguities are probably intentional.Pincrete (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Not clear to me what the grammatical rule states for "lodgins": Apostrophes are normally to be inserted whenever letters are dropped, at the dropped location. So without the final -s, there should be an apostrophe after the "n" to mark the dropping of the -g. However, inserting the apostrophe at that point causes the result here to look possessive to some. Can anyone cite an authority for a rule for this case? Jmacwiki (talk) 05:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I see you (Pincrete) have apparently changed your mind about the apostrophe in the intervening 4 years. No problem either way. Jmacwiki (talk) 05:47, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
The logic was that this is a quote of the actual text on the picture (ie we can't alter quotes). The apostrophe seems anyway to not help those who don't recognise this common mis-pronounciation of a fairly UK specific term. Pincrete (talk) 07:57, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Ah: I did not perceive that it was on the original picture. (The type was small enough that I overlooked it.) BTW, "lodgings" is a familiar enough term in the US as well, and pronouncing "-ing" as "-in" is also well recognized in informal speech. Jmacwiki (talk) 04:51, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Movie references[edit]

The movie section needs references. These should be trivial to provide (cite the movies!), but I do not know how to cite a movie. (It's published, and ultimate authority on its own content.) E.g., Myra Breckinridge reference inserted, but only inline. Jmacwiki (talk) 04:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Jmacwiki, properly speaking, we should be reffing not only the presence of these quotes, but also that they are double entendres. I'm not personally convinced that all are, rather than simply 'saucy speech'. As long as examples don't multiply excessively I tend not to worry, since the article is on my watchlist more by accident than design. Pincrete (talk) 19:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Agreed that some of the given Bond quotes are not, though the Bond movies are noted for their double entendres. Both West quotes are double entendres. I'm not sure what is meant by "[reffing] that they are double entendres", since this is the article's focus...? Jmacwiki (talk) 05:38, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
That someone (other than ourselves) has called it a d-e. This is the logic employed on some other 'word type' articles. As I said though, I'm too lazy to impose such a regime on a relatively harmless article, which hasn't so far become saturated with dubious examples. Pincrete (talk) 08:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Got it. Probably a good policy. I suppose I'm of the mind that applying a definition doesn't constitute [original] research, whether in linguistics or in algebra, though others might differ. Jmacwiki (talk) 04:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)