home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27 / NN_1992_27.iso / spool / alt / usage / english / 8719 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1992-11-21  |  1.0 KB  |  26 lines
  1. Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!seagoon.newcastle.edu.au!wombat.newcastle.edu.au!eepjm
  3. From: eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan)
  4. Subject: Re: Derivation of "wonk"
  5. Message-ID: <1992Nov21.210111.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au>
  6. Lines: 14
  7. Sender: news@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au
  8. Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
  9. References: <1d3u69INNpqp@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1992Nov3.184608.7707@nas.nasa.gov> <1dpfueINNo4m@agate.berkeley.edu> <1992Nov13.081549.20634@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>
  10. Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 10:01:11 GMT
  11.  
  12. In article <1992Nov13.081549.20634@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>, slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth L. Blumberg) writes:
  13. > Ted B Samsel writes:
  14. >>I like this word WONK. As in  policy WONK. Any ideas on the
  15. >>derivations thereof?
  16. >>-- 
  17. >>Ted....
  18. > 
  19. > Well, the Jargon File 2.9.10 gives it as originating from Australian slang.
  20. > Any Aussies out there who can confirm or deny this?
  21.  
  22. Sounds implausible - unless it's supposed to be a variant of "wank".
  23.  
  24. -- 
  25. Peter Moylan                      eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au
  26.