Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 29 Oct 1993 14:04:01 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 29 Oct 1993 13:57:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199310291757.AA02938@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1508; Fri, 29 Oct 93 13:54:46 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7816; Fri, 29 Oct 93 13:57:47 EDT Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1993 17:54:20 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: Bus boys: two nations divided by a common language X-To: lojban@cuvma.BITNET To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 29 Oct 93 17:58:03 N.) Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Fri Oct 29 17:54:20 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Matthew Faupel writes: > Never heard of "commis waiter" in my life I'm afraid - I'd have a better > chance of understanding "bus boy" than that. > > JC: job, n - "on the job" means, colloquially, engaged in sexual > JC: intercourse. > > I haven't heard this usage either. "On the job" has meant what is says > whenever I've heard it, e.g. "on the job training". I'm sure that under > certain circumstances this phrase could be a double-entendre, but then > practically anything can be (q.v. Finbarr Saunders). I assure John that he is reliably informed, but I think Matthew is right about commis waiter - "bus boy" would be more common now, though I've only ever heard the term used by my bus boy friends. John is right about "on the job", but Matthew is right about "on the job training", which means "training while engaged in work" and has nothing to do with sex, though indeed Finbarr Saunders (kahu) would think otherwise. WHAT IS THIS THREAD DOING ON LOJBAN LIST?