History of Bad Language: Profanity Part II

Profanity and spoken indecencies have existed since the birth of language. Across history and cultures, gestures, phrases, and single words have stirred controversy. Even today, such "bad language" is under continual scrutiny for censorship by governments and groups. Most would agree that they themselves, or other people in general, only utter expletives under extreme circumstances, e.g., pain, surprise, fear, anger, etc. Others use curse words as part of everyday speech, which may be common practice in the region they live or environment they work.

In America these word battles rage on, but there is absolutely no reason to fear or abhor the use of said "foul language." Since when have certain words risen through the ranks to become taboo? Where did they originate? Have their meanings changed and evolved over time? To demonstrate the importance of why people need not fear the use and tolerance of such words, this short series aims to examine the etymology (history and origin of words) of bad language.

In this second installment, the word s - - t will be examined, its true origin revealed, and the many phrases that have spawned from the word will also be covered. (For the remainder of this article, in order to adhere to the submission guidelines of AC, the word s- - t will be written as such with censoring dashes.)

First, let's cover some uncontroversial ground. To understand how the word has changed, the denotations of the word itself should be reviewed. Here is the modern dictionary definition of the word s - -t:

s - - t
-noun
1. excrement; feces.
2. an act of defecating; evacuation.
3. the s - - - s. diarrhea.
4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense.
5. Slang. something inferior or worthless.
6. Slang. a selfish, mean, or otherwise contemptible person.
7. Slang. narcotic drugs, esp. heroin or marijuana.
8. Slang. possessions, equipment, mementos, etc.; stuff.
-verb (used without object)
9. to defecate.
-verb (used with object)
10. Slang. to exaggerate or lie to.
-interjection
11. Slang. (used to express disgust, disappointment, frustration, contempt, or the like).
-Idioms
12. give a s - - t, Slang. to care; be concerned.
13. no s - - t, (used to express amazement, incredulity, or derision).
14. up s - - t creek, Slang. in a desperate or hopeless situation; in serious trouble. Also, up s - - t's creek, up s - - t creek without a paddle.

S - - t is used today as both a noun and a verb. It is interesting to note that the word itself was not printed in dictionaries until the 1970s; the modern reason because of its "course" meaning. Yet from this definition, it is clear the word reflects several things, none of which are deplorable.

As a noun, it describes excrement and in several slang terms can describe anything from a worthless or selfish person to narcotic drugs and an all-encompassing term for one's "stuff." It is also clearly an interjection, as none would argue against today, often expressing exaggeration or vulgar displeasure. And as a verb s - - t means to defecate or to lie. S - - t has also garnered many idioms and cousin phrases since its inception, which will be addressed later. For now, the simple word relating to defecation and descriptions of foul people and events will be enough to continue on with.

Now that the true definition of s - - t is disclosed, let's describe several of the false origin stories and etymological misrepresentations of how the word itself came to be. The most popular and false claim to how the word originated has made its rounds via email in recent years. This poor excuse for the word's history was usually forwarded to people, starting around 1999, as follows:

Certain types of manure used to be transported (as everything was back then) by ship. In dry form it weighs a lot less, but once water (at sea) hit it, it not only became heavier, but the process of fermentation began again, of which a by-product is methane gas.

As the stuff was stored below decks in bundles you can see what could (and did) happen; methane began to build up below decks and the first time someone came below at night with a lantern: BOOOOM!

Several ships were destroyed in this manner before it was discovered what was happening.

After that, the bundles of manure where always stamped with the term "S.H.I.T" on them which informed the sailors to "Ship High In Transit." In other words, high enough off the lower decks so that any water that came into the hold would not touch this volatile cargo and start the production of methane.

Say it with me: "This story about s - - t is wrong." In essence, it's full of s - - t. The word has never been recorded in any time in history as an acronym - not once. There are many reasons why this story has been claimed to make sense. After all, the word f - - k has similar and equally false claims as having originated from acronyms (Fornication Under Command of the King to name but one incarnation). For starters, the verb form of s - - t was the first from written and recorded; the noun derived from the verb. This story claims the exact opposite. As well, the word itself is at least 1,000 years older than when acronyms in speech, particularly English variants, commonly began to develop. The story itself has also been hacked to shreds by historians and linguists. There are no documented cases of these incidents (exploding ships from manure methane) ever happening on transport vessels - not from ship ledgers or shipping records. Lastly, the single biggest case against this tale is that s - - t has many cognates in other languages, ones outside of Germanic forms, that can be linked to how s - - t came to settle into the English lexicon.

Obviously this tale is preposterous, but entertaining enough to have etched itself into many a person's mind as the truth. The real truth is more grounded. In fact, the real truth about s - - t proves just how swayed people can become from a word they find "foul," though with its denotations the circumstances to perpetuate those beliefs were, most accurately, silly.

Has s - - t always been considered a "bad word?" The answer is no. The word at earlier times was worst regarded as blatant before the 1600s. Only after that date was it feigned from print of any sort - letters, novels, and so forth. Many researchers claim that it is because of the word's absence in mass publication during these centuries that s - - t today seems so young and course to most; it had no chance to grow or change from mass use. The word was left out of Shakespeare's works (though he did allude to and use other forms of then and now "bad words" in his plays), and even during the late 1700s s - - t was disguised by dashes much like the way I am typing them for this article.

There is no true indication as to why the word, in its simplest form, then meaning excrement or the act of defecating, became taboo. Certain theories revolve around the fact that to certain classes of society, the crass notion of discussing fecal matter in any form was distasteful and lowly. There are no records of our now modern slang terms and phrases involving s - - t appearing around the 1600s, indicating that only the most base form of the word would have been uttered or scribed at that time.

Several words outside of English have similar meanings around this same time frame, or earlier. It is widely believed and researched that the Old Norse word skita was used amongst widespread Germanic tribes during the centuries of the vast Roman Empire. In Old English, the word then was written as scitte. Onward it formed into Middle English as schitte. S - - t can also be traced early back to Proto-Germatic skit.

As English developed, other forms of the word replaced the old incarnations. It eventually became skheid, meaning to split or divide from the body, which is related to another word, shed, the notion of separation. These two words are likely candidates and displays of s - - t's original meanings of defecation securing themselves into English speech. In odd etymological terms, since the word stems from shed, it is a near cousin to other shed-stemming words, science and conscience.

It is clear that the word has crossed classes, countries, and centuries while retaining its original meaning of defecation or fecal matter. However, today there are many widely-used phrases involving s - - t that stem from older times and emphasize more honest, amiable connotations then one would first think.

Many of these phrases revolve around the word's first meaning of excrement, usually in the forms of interjections. Such shouts involving the word (like calling someone a s - - t head or a piece of s - - t) are by far the most condemned in our society today. In fact, those expletive yells are the reason why other phrases that take on many different connotations of the word, ones far from being obscene, still take a bad rap.

For instance, calling someone "s - - t faced" stems back to 1960s student slang, as in "s - - t-faced drunk." To "go apes - - t" means one is completely enraged, while to "not give a s - - t" means to not care how something is resolved, being first evidenced in 1922. Other phrases, such as "I'm in deep s - - t," relate back to other earlier examples, such as "up s - - t creek" (1937), describing a troubling situation one is in. We all know what being "scared s - - tless" means (1936), and to "shoot the s - - t" is to engage in friendly conversation. "Getting your s - - t together" stems back to s - - t being considered "stuff" and even the phrase "when the s - - t hits the fan" has been traced as first recited in a literal joke long before it was made infamous in the movie Airplane! And in hip-hop culture, to say that something is "the s - - t" is a compliment of something's value and style. A somewhat related term, bulls- - t is a term used to say that something is false, more in lines of the word humbug than related to s - - t itself.

The history and origin of the four-letter word s - - t is full of unexpected turns and certainly unexpected time frames dating back to the days of Caesar. The word still simply pertains to the biological function of defecating, yet has remained contemptuous to utter and write for several reasons, mainly its absence from print from the 1600s onward. As demonstrated in this article, s - - t can be used in rude expletives, but more phrases used today take on wholly appropriate descriptions of trouble, fear, or rage. Though there will always be arguments surrounding the word, the circumstances that forced it to be seen as a "bad word" from it simply pertaining to a natural mammalian function deserves to see light. Especially since many phrases today are humorous and positive, the main word itself is most certainly not deserving of the title of "foul language" anymore.

I'm not abdicating the use of hurtful words and phrases at all. I just hope that learning the true meaning and history of "bad language" will leave readers' minds more open to why other people use it and continue to use it under the laws and rights that our country grants us. Think about it, after all - how can we and why do we let one word like s - - t define people, sway laws, and bring fear into what we say? There is no reason for that if we all know and respect the word's history.