Does that phrase mean the same as “Give your balls a tug”?

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    I’ve only ever heard a Canadian say it, it means that they think your thoughts are all jumbled and if you shake your head a bit maybe some common sense will settle in. So maybe it’s Canadian slang, eh?

    • EABOD25@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Yeah but Canadian slang just kind of hits in a certain way that makes your brain wonder. Like Canadian speech is like a sub-english, and i want to learn it

        • EABOD25@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I’d prefer to refer to it as sub-english because it’s English… but it makes more sense to Canadians (of a certain regions) than the rest of the world until the rest of the world hears it and then it makes perfect sense. It’s not a new language. It’s just using an old language in a new way. If it was a dialect it would be like everything described by Jeff Foxworthy with his “you might be a redneck” jokes

          • Zahille7@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            That’s like calling the English Australians speak as “sub-english.”

            Also it just sounds wrong to refer to a dialect of a language as “sub-language” almost like you’re referring to people of a certain racial or ethnic group as “sub-people.” Just my two cents.

        • treadful@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          You all know they meant a subset of English and weren’t using it as a derogatory term.

        • EABOD25@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          Ok. I see what you’re doing. Nice try, but I don’t believe any person that speaks what I would consider a “sub-language” any lesser or pronouncedly different beyond region adaptations from around the world.

          You can continue to make me look racist, but my first statement had nothing to do with race, culture, or religion. So trying to create a narrative to portray me that way is redundant and asinine

          • Stovetop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            14 hours ago

            Then maybe pick a prefix that isn’t synonymous with “beneath/lower” if that’s the idea you’re trying to get across.

            • EABOD25@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              14 hours ago

              I’ll try to carefully use the short word for “substitute” a little better. I’d recommend learning all definitions of a word before you assume what people are saying

              • Stovetop@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                14 hours ago

                Sub- as a prefix does not mean substitute, though. The word “substitute” is made with that prefix but it doesn’t represent it any more than “submarine”.

                • EABOD25@lemm.eeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  So then beside what I told you, what if I meant “submarine-english”?