Why is it “take a leak?”How long does it take to mull something over?Is “all in all” the right choice...
PTIJ: Is all laundering forbidden during the 9 days?
Why did the Cray-1 have 8 parity bits per word?
PTIJ: Mordechai mourning
Is every open circuit a capacitor?
GPL code private and stolen
How does signal strength relate to bandwidth?
How does insurance birth control work?
Ahoy, Ye Traveler!
Rationale to prefer local variables over instance variables?
What is better: yes / no radio, or simple checkbox?
How do you say “my friend is throwing a party, do you wanna come?” in german
Relationship between the symmetry number of a molecule as used in rotational spectroscopy and point group
Can a space-faring robot still function over a billion years?
Sometimes a banana is just a banana
Are there other characters in the Star Wars universe who had damaged bodies and needed to wear an outfit like Darth Vader?
Can we carry rice to Japan?
Can a Trickery Domain cleric cast a spell through the Invoke Duplicity clone while inside a Forcecage?
How can I be pwned if I'm not registered on the compromised site?
Was it really inappropriate to write a pull request for the company I interviewed with?
Should I use HTTPS on a domain that will only be used for redirection?
Giving a talk in my old university, how prominently should I tell students my salary?
Called into a meeting and told we are being made redundant (laid off) and "not to share outside". Can I tell my partner?
Wardrobe above a wall with fuse boxes
Lock enemy's y-axis when using Vector3.MoveTowards to follow the player
Why is it “take a leak?”
How long does it take to mull something over?Is “all in all” the right choice for the following sentence?“Take heed” vs “pay heed”Does English slang have a feminine version of “breaking someone's balls”?When to use “to take a walk” & when to use “to walk”?“Come this May, I will…” Why am I using “come”?Why Lovecraft never used the word “cultist”?Should I use a semicolon or a comma when listing the features of a room?“too big a” vs “a too big”What does “You shake my nerves” and “Shake off the nerves” mean?
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
|
show 3 more comments
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
7
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
yesterday
2
@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
yesterday
2
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
yesterday
1
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
yesterday
1
@AzorAhai Because it seems to fit better than "take". When a person urinates, they are not taking anything, but are, in some ways, giving something.
– RockPaperLizard
yesterday
|
show 3 more comments
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
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 yesterday
RockPaperLizardRockPaperLizard
55611020
55611020
7
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
yesterday
2
@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
yesterday
2
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
yesterday
1
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
yesterday
1
@AzorAhai Because it seems to fit better than "take". When a person urinates, they are not taking anything, but are, in some ways, giving something.
– RockPaperLizard
yesterday
|
show 3 more comments
7
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
yesterday
2
@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
yesterday
2
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
yesterday
1
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
yesterday
1
@AzorAhai Because it seems to fit better than "take". When a person urinates, they are not taking anything, but are, in some ways, giving something.
– RockPaperLizard
yesterday
7
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
2
2
@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
yesterday
@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
yesterday
2
2
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
1
1
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
yesterday
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
yesterday
1
1
@AzorAhai Because it seems to fit better than "take". When a person urinates, they are not taking anything, but are, in some ways, giving something.
– RockPaperLizard
yesterday
@AzorAhai Because it seems to fit better than "take". When a person urinates, they are not taking anything, but are, in some ways, giving something.
– RockPaperLizard
yesterday
|
show 3 more comments
3 Answers
3
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 are 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 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.
4
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
3
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
add a comment |
We can 'take a piss' or 'have a piss'. We can 'take a leak' but 'have a leak' is not idiomatic. And we can simply 'piss' but to 'leak' suggests involuntary incontinence. Then there's 'take the piss' which means something quite different (make fun of something) or its 'piss-elegant' version 'extract the urine'.
We can do a little grammatical anaysis. 'Piss' may be a verb or a noun, but 'leak' is only a verb. We may step in a pool of piss but not a pool of leak. But I don't think there's any value in dissecting the difference between 'take' and 'have'. If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example.
4
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Disclaimer: I am far from a scholar in the English language.
I had always understood usage of the word "take" in these situations to simply be a shortened version "take time out/off for", as in:
"Take time off for a vacation",
"Take time out for a nap",
etcetera...
Another way to think of this would be the fact that what is being inferred as taken would be "time from your day/week/life"...
New contributor
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
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
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 are 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 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.
4
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
3
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
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 are 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 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.
4
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
3
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
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 are 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 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.
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 are 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 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.
edited 16 hours ago
answered yesterday
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
5,0681027
5,0681027
4
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
3
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
add a comment |
4
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
3
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
4
4
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
I always take the 'take' part to connote that they 'opt' to take the action. They could have held onto it, but they 'took the option', they 'opted' to let it go.
– Pureferret
20 hours ago
3
3
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
@Pureferret That works, and compares well with something like "take a shot" or "take a swing." (Or, as yelled in the imperative, "TAKE THE SHOT!")
– TaliesinMerlin
16 hours ago
add a comment |
We can 'take a piss' or 'have a piss'. We can 'take a leak' but 'have a leak' is not idiomatic. And we can simply 'piss' but to 'leak' suggests involuntary incontinence. Then there's 'take the piss' which means something quite different (make fun of something) or its 'piss-elegant' version 'extract the urine'.
We can do a little grammatical anaysis. 'Piss' may be a verb or a noun, but 'leak' is only a verb. We may step in a pool of piss but not a pool of leak. But I don't think there's any value in dissecting the difference between 'take' and 'have'. If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example.
4
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
add a comment |
We can 'take a piss' or 'have a piss'. We can 'take a leak' but 'have a leak' is not idiomatic. And we can simply 'piss' but to 'leak' suggests involuntary incontinence. Then there's 'take the piss' which means something quite different (make fun of something) or its 'piss-elegant' version 'extract the urine'.
We can do a little grammatical anaysis. 'Piss' may be a verb or a noun, but 'leak' is only a verb. We may step in a pool of piss but not a pool of leak. But I don't think there's any value in dissecting the difference between 'take' and 'have'. If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example.
4
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
add a comment |
We can 'take a piss' or 'have a piss'. We can 'take a leak' but 'have a leak' is not idiomatic. And we can simply 'piss' but to 'leak' suggests involuntary incontinence. Then there's 'take the piss' which means something quite different (make fun of something) or its 'piss-elegant' version 'extract the urine'.
We can do a little grammatical anaysis. 'Piss' may be a verb or a noun, but 'leak' is only a verb. We may step in a pool of piss but not a pool of leak. But I don't think there's any value in dissecting the difference between 'take' and 'have'. If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example.
We can 'take a piss' or 'have a piss'. We can 'take a leak' but 'have a leak' is not idiomatic. And we can simply 'piss' but to 'leak' suggests involuntary incontinence. Then there's 'take the piss' which means something quite different (make fun of something) or its 'piss-elegant' version 'extract the urine'.
We can do a little grammatical anaysis. 'Piss' may be a verb or a noun, but 'leak' is only a verb. We may step in a pool of piss but not a pool of leak. But I don't think there's any value in dissecting the difference between 'take' and 'have'. If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example.
edited 15 hours ago
answered 16 hours ago
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
60437
60437
4
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
add a comment |
4
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
4
4
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
I'm not really getting much from this, beyond, "*shrug* That's just how it is."
– David Richerby
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
Well, there's a conclusion drawn in the first part. But between 'take' and 'have', If we try to derive a rule, it will just be contradicted by another example. We can lable this as 'delexical' or 'empty' (as @TaliesinMerlin suggests) if we like.
– Laurence Payne
15 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
'leak' is also a noun, e.g. 'he put a bucket under a leak'; it just doesn't refer to the type of matter; you can step in a sewage leak or an oil leak, but not a helium leak or a password leak.
– Pete Kirkham
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Disclaimer: I am far from a scholar in the English language.
I had always understood usage of the word "take" in these situations to simply be a shortened version "take time out/off for", as in:
"Take time off for a vacation",
"Take time out for a nap",
etcetera...
Another way to think of this would be the fact that what is being inferred as taken would be "time from your day/week/life"...
New contributor
add a comment |
Disclaimer: I am far from a scholar in the English language.
I had always understood usage of the word "take" in these situations to simply be a shortened version "take time out/off for", as in:
"Take time off for a vacation",
"Take time out for a nap",
etcetera...
Another way to think of this would be the fact that what is being inferred as taken would be "time from your day/week/life"...
New contributor
add a comment |
Disclaimer: I am far from a scholar in the English language.
I had always understood usage of the word "take" in these situations to simply be a shortened version "take time out/off for", as in:
"Take time off for a vacation",
"Take time out for a nap",
etcetera...
Another way to think of this would be the fact that what is being inferred as taken would be "time from your day/week/life"...
New contributor
Disclaimer: I am far from a scholar in the English language.
I had always understood usage of the word "take" in these situations to simply be a shortened version "take time out/off for", as in:
"Take time off for a vacation",
"Take time out for a nap",
etcetera...
Another way to think of this would be the fact that what is being inferred as taken would be "time from your day/week/life"...
New contributor
New contributor
answered 6 hours ago
HitekHitek
1
1
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
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
7
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
yesterday
2
@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
yesterday
2
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
yesterday
1
Why do you think "give" would fit better?
– Azor Ahai
yesterday
1
@AzorAhai Because it seems to fit better than "take". When a person urinates, they are not taking anything, but are, in some ways, giving something.
– RockPaperLizard
yesterday