English questions

[Travis B.]

Is the idiom "to rub someone the wrong way" a sexual metaphor? Does using it, or variants of it, constitute "using sexual language" in contexts where that might be inappropriate? And can you think of a related idiom without sexual connotations that might be used as a replacement?

I have never, ever heard of it being preceived in such a fashion.

[Raphael]

I have never, ever heard of it being preceived in such a fashion.

But what, exactly, was it originally referring too, if not sexual stimulation? (Or, more precisely, failed attempts at it?)

[Travis B.]

I have never, ever heard of it being preceived in such a fashion.

But what, exactly, was it originally referring too, if not sexual stimulation? (Or, more precisely, failed attempts at it?)

If anything, what the phrase evokes for me is attempting to pet an animal the wrong way.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

I've usually thought of it as either that, or something like uncomfortable clothing feeling uncomfortable against your skin.

[Richard W]

If anything, what the phrase evokes for me is attempting to pet an animal the wrong way.

For example, I have a vague recollection of being warned that there was only one direction for stroking a cat. And I too perceive no sexual allusion in the expression.

[bradrn]

Is the idiom "to rub someone the wrong way" a sexual metaphor?

Not at all. I’d say it comes from cats: if you stroke a cat against the direction of their fur, it tends to become somewhat displeased (to put it lightly).

[Raphael]

Thank you, everyone!

[bradrn]

Oh, wow, there was a whole other page of replies I never even noticed… now I feel silly. Oh well, at least I agreed with the other answerers.

[Moose-tache]

Is the English word "rub" assumed by L2 learners to have an inherently sexual meaning?

[Raphael]

Is the English word "rub" assumed by L2 learners to have an inherently sexual meaning?

Not in general. But when the thing being rubbed is a person, then I can't see that many possible non-sexual motives.

[Ares Land]

I never realized until now it was the same metaphor as French 'prendre à rebrousse poil.'

[Raphael]

Different question: What is the difference between between an introduction and a foreword? If I've written a short introductory text for a much longer text, by which standards should I decide which of these words I should use for it?

[Rounin Ryuuji]

This is one I had to look up, but apparently —

(1) A "foreword" is written by somebody other than the author of the larger text;
(2) A "preface" is written by the author of the larger text, but is not necessarily a part of it or essential to understanding it;
(3) An "introduction" is both written by the author of the larger text, and is somehow part of or necessary to understand the larger text.

I don't think most ordinary people are going to make such a distinction; my initial thought on the difference between them is that one looks English, one Norman, and one like a Classicalism.

[Raphael]

Thank you! So I can rule out "foreword" straight away. As for the distinction between "preface" and "introduction" - you're saying that it's entirely a structural thing? It's not, say, about the length of the text in question?

[Rounin Ryuuji]

It seems to be mostly about the content of the — let's call it a foretext. Does it simply tell a bit about the larger text without being necessary to understand it, or does it provide some meaningful addition to the text that follows that helps to explain it in some way that what follows would be difficult to understand without it?

[Raphael]

I'll have to think about that.

[Travis B.]

It seems to be mostly about the content of the — let's call it a foretext. Does it simply tell a bit about the larger text without being necessary to understand it, or does it provide some meaningful addition to the text that follows that helps to explain it in some way that what follows would be difficult to understand without it?

I agree - a preface is not an integral part of the following text and can be skipped without impacting one's understanding of the text as a whole, whereas an introduction is an integral part of the following text and cannot be simply skipped without losing part of the meaning of the text.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

And all are distinct from a prologue, which is more-or-less a chapter zero.

[Richard W]

Is the English word "rub" assumed by L2 learners to have an inherently sexual meaning?

Not in general. But when the thing being rubbed is a person, then I can't see that many possible non-sexual motives.

Rubbing people dry and rubbing ointments in are the two primary examples that come to mind, and neither need have sexual motives, though they can be adapted that way. There's nothing sexual about, "You rub my back and I'll rub yours".

[Raphael]

And all are distinct from a prologue, which is more-or-less a chapter zero.

Well, prologues are usually (though not always) associated with fiction, while the other three are strongly associated with non-fiction.