Why is it “take a leak?”
Why is the sometimes-used expression to urinate "take a leak" or "take a piss", instead of "give a leak" or "give a piss".
I looked it up using a search engine, and didn't find any good answers.
word-usage slang
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
add a comment |
Why is the sometimes-used expression to urinate "take a leak" or "take a piss", instead of "give a leak" or "give a piss".
I looked it up using a search engine, and didn't find any good answers.
word-usage slang
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
3
Take, have, and get are "little verbs" that don't mean anything and can be used to make a noun into a verb, if one needs to. They're idiomatic, though -- which ones varies: take a shit/piss/bath/shower/leak/dive, have breakfast/some rest/a shit/a piss/a bath/a swim/a run, get some food/some rest/a shower/a haircut/a shave.
– John Lawler
5 hours ago
@JohnLawler Thanks. I'd be very interested if you can expand your comment into an answer. Are you saying in some contexts take, have, and get don't mean anything, and in other contexts they do?
– RockPaperLizard
5 hours ago
Yes. Like auxiliary verbs and articles and prepositions and complementizers, there are other words that are nuts and bolts of grammar rather than meaningful lexical elements. Many of them have some meanings that can get out in certain circumstances, but much of their use is as part of a construction.
– John Lawler
4 hours ago
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Why is the sometimes-used expression to urinate "take a leak" or "take a piss", instead of "give a leak" or "give a piss".
I looked it up using a search engine, and didn't find any good answers.
word-usage slang
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
Why is the sometimes-used expression to urinate "take a leak" or "take a piss", instead of "give a leak" or "give a piss".
I looked it up using a search engine, and didn't find any good answers.
word-usage slang
word-usage slang
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
asked 5 hours ago
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
4411818
4411818
3
Take, have, and get are "little verbs" that don't mean anything and can be used to make a noun into a verb, if one needs to. They're idiomatic, though -- which ones varies: take a shit/piss/bath/shower/leak/dive, have breakfast/some rest/a shit/a piss/a bath/a swim/a run, get some food/some rest/a shower/a haircut/a shave.
– John Lawler
5 hours ago
@JohnLawler Thanks. I'd be very interested if you can expand your comment into an answer. Are you saying in some contexts take, have, and get don't mean anything, and in other contexts they do?
– RockPaperLizard
5 hours ago
Yes. Like auxiliary verbs and articles and prepositions and complementizers, there are other words that are nuts and bolts of grammar rather than meaningful lexical elements. Many of them have some meanings that can get out in certain circumstances, but much of their use is as part of a construction.
– John Lawler
4 hours ago
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
2 hours ago
add a comment |
3
Take, have, and get are "little verbs" that don't mean anything and can be used to make a noun into a verb, if one needs to. They're idiomatic, though -- which ones varies: take a shit/piss/bath/shower/leak/dive, have breakfast/some rest/a shit/a piss/a bath/a swim/a run, get some food/some rest/a shower/a haircut/a shave.
– John Lawler
5 hours ago
@JohnLawler Thanks. I'd be very interested if you can expand your comment into an answer. Are you saying in some contexts take, have, and get don't mean anything, and in other contexts they do?
– RockPaperLizard
5 hours ago
Yes. Like auxiliary verbs and articles and prepositions and complementizers, there are other words that are nuts and bolts of grammar rather than meaningful lexical elements. Many of them have some meanings that can get out in certain circumstances, but much of their use is as part of a construction.
– John Lawler
4 hours ago
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
2 hours ago
3
3
Take, have, and get are "little verbs" that don't mean anything and can be used to make a noun into a verb, if one needs to. They're idiomatic, though -- which ones varies: take a shit/piss/bath/shower/leak/dive, have breakfast/some rest/a shit/a piss/a bath/a swim/a run, get some food/some rest/a shower/a haircut/a shave.
– John Lawler
5 hours ago
Take, have, and get are "little verbs" that don't mean anything and can be used to make a noun into a verb, if one needs to. They're idiomatic, though -- which ones varies: take a shit/piss/bath/shower/leak/dive, have breakfast/some rest/a shit/a piss/a bath/a swim/a run, get some food/some rest/a shower/a haircut/a shave.
– John Lawler
5 hours ago
@JohnLawler Thanks. I'd be very interested if you can expand your comment into an answer. Are you saying in some contexts take, have, and get don't mean anything, and in other contexts they do?
– RockPaperLizard
5 hours ago
@JohnLawler Thanks. I'd be very interested if you can expand your comment into an answer. Are you saying in some contexts take, have, and get don't mean anything, and in other contexts they do?
– RockPaperLizard
5 hours ago
Yes. Like auxiliary verbs and articles and prepositions and complementizers, there are other words that are nuts and bolts of grammar rather than meaningful lexical elements. Many of them have some meanings that can get out in certain circumstances, but much of their use is as part of a construction.
– John Lawler
4 hours ago
Yes. Like auxiliary verbs and articles and prepositions and complementizers, there are other words that are nuts and bolts of grammar rather than meaningful lexical elements. Many of them have some meanings that can get out in certain circumstances, but much of their use is as part of a construction.
– John Lawler
4 hours ago
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
2 hours ago
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
It is because one takes an action, leak or piss denote actions, and the noun forms of these actions ended up using take instead of other available verbs.
To "leak," meaning to "make water" or piss, was first a verb. Shakespeare, Henry IV part 1:
Why, they will allow us ne'er a jordan, and then we
leak in your chimney; and your chamber-lie breeds
fleas like a loach.
And piss, as a verb, goes back to Middle English. Chaucer, the Parson's Tale:
An hound, whan he comth by the roser or by othere beautees, thogh he may nat pisse, yet wole he heue vp his leg and make a contenaunce to pisse.
By the 20th century, both words could also serve as nouns, denoting the action of leaking or pissing, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. At the same time, they acquired a periphrastic use in the phrase to take a leak:
(Tropic of Cancer, 1934) I stood there taking a leak.
(Heartless, 1934) There were puddles of sludge from the mud of the road, the waste water of the saloon, and any number of passing drunkards who thought to stop and take a piss on their way through.
Why take? Basically, take in this usage emphasizes the following noun. When verbs do this, they ares called delexical or empty because the verb is less important than the following noun. To take a piss => to piss. To take a leak => to leak. It's not that anything is being literally taken, as with other meanings of to take, but rather that here the verb introduces an action. Here is how the OED explains take as a delexical verb that emphasizes carrying out the following action:
81.a. To make, do, perform (an act, action, movement, etc.); to carry out. Often take forms with the object a phrase which is a periphrastic equivalent of the cognate verb: e.g. to take a leap is equivalent to to leap, to take a look to to look, to take one's departure to to depart, etc.
"have, v." has virtually the same entry (22). It's hard to answer why take was the verb and not, say, have. Without direct evidence (which would be very hard to come by for common periphrastic forms), I can only guess that it's an accident of use.
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
add a comment |
Those are Delexical Verbs.
this should help you understand them better:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar/delexical-verbs-have-take-make-and-give
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f488421%2fwhy-is-it-take-a-leak%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It is because one takes an action, leak or piss denote actions, and the noun forms of these actions ended up using take instead of other available verbs.
To "leak," meaning to "make water" or piss, was first a verb. Shakespeare, Henry IV part 1:
Why, they will allow us ne'er a jordan, and then we
leak in your chimney; and your chamber-lie breeds
fleas like a loach.
And piss, as a verb, goes back to Middle English. Chaucer, the Parson's Tale:
An hound, whan he comth by the roser or by othere beautees, thogh he may nat pisse, yet wole he heue vp his leg and make a contenaunce to pisse.
By the 20th century, both words could also serve as nouns, denoting the action of leaking or pissing, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. At the same time, they acquired a periphrastic use in the phrase to take a leak:
(Tropic of Cancer, 1934) I stood there taking a leak.
(Heartless, 1934) There were puddles of sludge from the mud of the road, the waste water of the saloon, and any number of passing drunkards who thought to stop and take a piss on their way through.
Why take? Basically, take in this usage emphasizes the following noun. When verbs do this, they ares called delexical or empty because the verb is less important than the following noun. To take a piss => to piss. To take a leak => to leak. It's not that anything is being literally taken, as with other meanings of to take, but rather that here the verb introduces an action. Here is how the OED explains take as a delexical verb that emphasizes carrying out the following action:
81.a. To make, do, perform (an act, action, movement, etc.); to carry out. Often take forms with the object a phrase which is a periphrastic equivalent of the cognate verb: e.g. to take a leap is equivalent to to leap, to take a look to to look, to take one's departure to to depart, etc.
"have, v." has virtually the same entry (22). It's hard to answer why take was the verb and not, say, have. Without direct evidence (which would be very hard to come by for common periphrastic forms), I can only guess that it's an accident of use.
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
add a comment |
It is because one takes an action, leak or piss denote actions, and the noun forms of these actions ended up using take instead of other available verbs.
To "leak," meaning to "make water" or piss, was first a verb. Shakespeare, Henry IV part 1:
Why, they will allow us ne'er a jordan, and then we
leak in your chimney; and your chamber-lie breeds
fleas like a loach.
And piss, as a verb, goes back to Middle English. Chaucer, the Parson's Tale:
An hound, whan he comth by the roser or by othere beautees, thogh he may nat pisse, yet wole he heue vp his leg and make a contenaunce to pisse.
By the 20th century, both words could also serve as nouns, denoting the action of leaking or pissing, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. At the same time, they acquired a periphrastic use in the phrase to take a leak:
(Tropic of Cancer, 1934) I stood there taking a leak.
(Heartless, 1934) There were puddles of sludge from the mud of the road, the waste water of the saloon, and any number of passing drunkards who thought to stop and take a piss on their way through.
Why take? Basically, take in this usage emphasizes the following noun. When verbs do this, they ares called delexical or empty because the verb is less important than the following noun. To take a piss => to piss. To take a leak => to leak. It's not that anything is being literally taken, as with other meanings of to take, but rather that here the verb introduces an action. Here is how the OED explains take as a delexical verb that emphasizes carrying out the following action:
81.a. To make, do, perform (an act, action, movement, etc.); to carry out. Often take forms with the object a phrase which is a periphrastic equivalent of the cognate verb: e.g. to take a leap is equivalent to to leap, to take a look to to look, to take one's departure to to depart, etc.
"have, v." has virtually the same entry (22). It's hard to answer why take was the verb and not, say, have. Without direct evidence (which would be very hard to come by for common periphrastic forms), I can only guess that it's an accident of use.
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
add a comment |
It is because one takes an action, leak or piss denote actions, and the noun forms of these actions ended up using take instead of other available verbs.
To "leak," meaning to "make water" or piss, was first a verb. Shakespeare, Henry IV part 1:
Why, they will allow us ne'er a jordan, and then we
leak in your chimney; and your chamber-lie breeds
fleas like a loach.
And piss, as a verb, goes back to Middle English. Chaucer, the Parson's Tale:
An hound, whan he comth by the roser or by othere beautees, thogh he may nat pisse, yet wole he heue vp his leg and make a contenaunce to pisse.
By the 20th century, both words could also serve as nouns, denoting the action of leaking or pissing, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. At the same time, they acquired a periphrastic use in the phrase to take a leak:
(Tropic of Cancer, 1934) I stood there taking a leak.
(Heartless, 1934) There were puddles of sludge from the mud of the road, the waste water of the saloon, and any number of passing drunkards who thought to stop and take a piss on their way through.
Why take? Basically, take in this usage emphasizes the following noun. When verbs do this, they ares called delexical or empty because the verb is less important than the following noun. To take a piss => to piss. To take a leak => to leak. It's not that anything is being literally taken, as with other meanings of to take, but rather that here the verb introduces an action. Here is how the OED explains take as a delexical verb that emphasizes carrying out the following action:
81.a. To make, do, perform (an act, action, movement, etc.); to carry out. Often take forms with the object a phrase which is a periphrastic equivalent of the cognate verb: e.g. to take a leap is equivalent to to leap, to take a look to to look, to take one's departure to to depart, etc.
"have, v." has virtually the same entry (22). It's hard to answer why take was the verb and not, say, have. Without direct evidence (which would be very hard to come by for common periphrastic forms), I can only guess that it's an accident of use.
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
It is because one takes an action, leak or piss denote actions, and the noun forms of these actions ended up using take instead of other available verbs.
To "leak," meaning to "make water" or piss, was first a verb. Shakespeare, Henry IV part 1:
Why, they will allow us ne'er a jordan, and then we
leak in your chimney; and your chamber-lie breeds
fleas like a loach.
And piss, as a verb, goes back to Middle English. Chaucer, the Parson's Tale:
An hound, whan he comth by the roser or by othere beautees, thogh he may nat pisse, yet wole he heue vp his leg and make a contenaunce to pisse.
By the 20th century, both words could also serve as nouns, denoting the action of leaking or pissing, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. At the same time, they acquired a periphrastic use in the phrase to take a leak:
(Tropic of Cancer, 1934) I stood there taking a leak.
(Heartless, 1934) There were puddles of sludge from the mud of the road, the waste water of the saloon, and any number of passing drunkards who thought to stop and take a piss on their way through.
Why take? Basically, take in this usage emphasizes the following noun. When verbs do this, they ares called delexical or empty because the verb is less important than the following noun. To take a piss => to piss. To take a leak => to leak. It's not that anything is being literally taken, as with other meanings of to take, but rather that here the verb introduces an action. Here is how the OED explains take as a delexical verb that emphasizes carrying out the following action:
81.a. To make, do, perform (an act, action, movement, etc.); to carry out. Often take forms with the object a phrase which is a periphrastic equivalent of the cognate verb: e.g. to take a leap is equivalent to to leap, to take a look to to look, to take one's departure to to depart, etc.
"have, v." has virtually the same entry (22). It's hard to answer why take was the verb and not, say, have. Without direct evidence (which would be very hard to come by for common periphrastic forms), I can only guess that it's an accident of use.
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
4,866926
4,866926
add a comment |
add a comment |
Those are Delexical Verbs.
this should help you understand them better:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar/delexical-verbs-have-take-make-and-give
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Those are Delexical Verbs.
this should help you understand them better:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar/delexical-verbs-have-take-make-and-give
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Those are Delexical Verbs.
this should help you understand them better:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar/delexical-verbs-have-take-make-and-give
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
Those are Delexical Verbs.
this should help you understand them better:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar/delexical-verbs-have-take-make-and-give
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
answered 5 hours ago
Uhtred RagnarssonUhtred Ragnarsson
47926
47926
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
add a comment |
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
This is currently a link only answer which is frowned upon on Stack Exchange. Please expand your answer to include the relevant information from the link. (e.g. What is a "delexical verb", in what situations would you use them, and most critically, why you would choose "take" instead of "give" in the example sentences?)
– R.M.
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f488421%2fwhy-is-it-take-a-leak%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Take, have, and get are "little verbs" that don't mean anything and can be used to make a noun into a verb, if one needs to. They're idiomatic, though -- which ones varies: take a shit/piss/bath/shower/leak/dive, have breakfast/some rest/a shit/a piss/a bath/a swim/a run, get some food/some rest/a shower/a haircut/a shave.
– John Lawler
5 hours ago
@JohnLawler Thanks. I'd be very interested if you can expand your comment into an answer. Are you saying in some contexts take, have, and get don't mean anything, and in other contexts they do?
– RockPaperLizard
5 hours ago
Yes. Like auxiliary verbs and articles and prepositions and complementizers, there are other words that are nuts and bolts of grammar rather than meaningful lexical elements. Many of them have some meanings that can get out in certain circumstances, but much of their use is as part of a construction.
– John Lawler
4 hours ago
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
2 hours ago