Language desk
< October 21	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 23 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 22[edit]

Scottish question?[edit]

In his short story "The Howdie", John Galt says "but among other regimental clanjamphry". What does this mean and where did the word derive from? Thank you. 86.187.237.248 (talk) 19:07, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to the OED, the word means 1. Trumpery, rubbish, things of little value. 2. Spoken ‘rubbish’; nonsensical talk, ‘rot’. 3. ‘Trumpery’ or worthless people, or those who are so viewed; rabble, mob, canaille; also ‘applied to the purse-proud vulgar’. The origin is said to be "uncertain", with the note Scott's clanjamphry suggests a contemptuous reference to a Highland Clan, e.g. Clan Chattan, Clanranald, etc.; and jampher occurs in Scots dialects, variously used as ‘scoffer, mocker, trifler, idler, shuffler’, so that clan-jamphery would give a passable sense. But it is more probable that the original idea is ‘trumpery’, and that the personal use is derived. CodeTalker (talk) 20:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to (Sir Walter) Scott in the OED stems from his use of the term (spelled clanjamfrie) in Tales of my Landlord (1816),^[1] the earliest known recorded use. The quoted text ‘applied to the purse-proud vulgar’ is taken from Jamieson's Dictionary of the Scottish Language, which lists the term under the lemma CLAMJAMPHIRE.^[2] --Lambiam 09:17, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That would be John Galt (novelist) (1779–1839) not the Ayn Rand novel character, although the primacy of the latter seems a bit questionable. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:21, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What pity that "trumpery" is defined as being archaic. It would have been a useful term. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, one wonders if that's an "unimpeachable source". Martinevans123 (talk) 10:17, 23 October 2021 (UTC) p.s. great to see we have a whole article on Gaberlunzie.[reply]

It is still a useful term, regardless. And it's not so archaic that it doesn't occur here and there in contemporary discourse. Have at it, I say. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:49, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]