Bloody

{{short description|Expletive intensifier}} {{About|the word used as an intensifier}} {{Redirect|Bloody hell|the 2020 film|Bloody Hell (2020 film)|the 2023 film|Bloody Hell (2023 film)}} {{More citations needed|date=May 2022}} {{italictitle}} {{Use dmy dates|date=July 2020}} {{Wiktionary}} {{TOC_Right}}

'''''Bloody''''', as an adjective or adverb, is an expletive attributive commonly used in British English, Irish English, New Zealand English and Australian English; it is also present in Canadian English, Indian English, Malaysian/Singaporean English, Hawaiian English, South African English, Zimbabwean English, Kenyan English, and a number of other Commonwealth nations. It has been used as an intensive since at least the 1670s.<ref>Sterfania Biscetti, "The diachronic development of ''bloody'': a case study in historical pragmatics". In Richard Dury, Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena (eds.) ''English Historical Linguistics 2006 Volume 2: Lexical and semantic change''. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2008, p. 55.</ref> Considered respectable until about 1750, it was heavily tabooed during c. 1750–1920, considered equivalent to heavily obscene or profane speech.{{Citation needed|date=October 2018}} Public use continued to be seen as controversial until the 1960s, but the word has since become a comparatively mild expletive or intensifier.{{Citation needed|date=August 2020}}

In American English, the word is used almost exclusively in its literal sense to describe something that is covered in blood; when used as an intensifier, it is seen by American audiences as a stereotypical marker of a British- or Irish-English speaker, without any significant obscene or profane connotations.

==Origin== Use of the adjective ''bloody'' as a profane intensifier predates the 18th century. Its ultimate origin is unclear, and several hypotheses have been suggested. It may be a direct loan of Dutch ''bloote'', (modern spelling blote) meaning ''naked'', ''bare'' or ''uncovered'', which was suggested by Ker (1837) to have been "transformed into ''bloody'', in the consequently absurd phrases of ''bloody good'', ''bloody bad'', ''bloody thief'', ''bloody angry'', etc., where it simply implies completely, entirely, purely, very, truly, and has no relation to either blood or murder, except by corruption of the word."<ref>John Bellenden Ker, An Essay on the Archæology of our Popular Phrases and Nursery Rhymes, London:Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green & Co., 1837, pg 36.</ref>

The word "blood" in Dutch and German is used as part of minced oaths, in abbreviation of expressions referring to "God's blood", i.e. the Passion or the Eucharist. Ernest Weekley (1921) relates English usage to imitation of purely intensive use of Dutch ''bloed'' and German ''Blut'' in the early modern period.

Paradoxically, though, even though the word "bloody" has Germanic origins, its use as a swear word most likely entered English from the French, or, more specifically, the Anglo Norman language, the dialect of French spoken in England after the Norman Conquest of 1066. According to Emily Reed (2018), "sanglant" (meaning "bloody") was used as an expletive in Anglo Norman, with published examples dating back to 1396. In that year, two examples of such insults appeared in ''Manières de langage'', a medieval textbook for French-language learners. Subsequent publications (the French farce ''Pathelin'' and the ''Chronique de Charles VII'') indicate that the word was commonly used as an insult in the Norman dialect of French spoken in England.<ref>Reed, Emily (March 15, 2018). "[https://theconversation.com/english-swearings-european-origins-92937 English swearing’s European origins]," ''The Conversation''. Accessed December 31, 2024.</ref>

A popularly reported theory suggested euphemistic derivation from the phrase ''by Our Lady''. The contracted form ''by'r Lady'' is common in Shakespeare's plays around the turn of the 17th century, and Jonathan Swift about 100 years later writes both "it grows by'r Lady cold" and "it was bloody hot walking to-day"<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Works_of_the_Rev._Jonathan_Swift/Volume_15/Journal_to_Stella_%E2%80%93_Letter_24 |title=The Journal to Stella, by Jonathan Swift : Letter 24 |publisher=Etext.library.adelaide.edu.au |date=1711 }}</ref> suggesting that ''bloody'' and ''by'r Lady'' had become exchangeable generic intensifiers. However, Eric Partridge (1933) describes the supposed derivation of ''bloody'' as a further contraction of ''by'r lady'' as "phonetically implausible". <!-- The immediately following text was apparently removed from the rendered content of the article but preserved for the attention of editors: {{ Geoffrey Hughes in ''Swearing: A social history of foul langyuage, oaths and profanity in English'' (Blackwell, 1991), points out that "by my lady" is not an adjective whereas ''bloody'' is, and suggests that the slang use of the term started with ''bloody drunk'' meaning "fired up and ready for a fight". }} In contrast, *this* immediately following text seems to be a comment by an editor who removed the previous brace-enclosed material from the rendered portion of the article text: {{ not sure what this is supposed to add other than that this author in 1991(!) was not even aware of the adverbial use of ''by'r lady'' just cited }}

If i remember to, i'll copy this inside-a-comment discussion (begun here, in an abuse of the comment-markup facility by an as yet unidentified colleague, and continued here by my own somewhat milder abuse) to where it belongs, on the accompanying talk page, using a better interface, and with detailed info on the edit history of this comment. -- User Jerzy, 2018 Jan 3, 9-PM-ish, (US)EDT --> According to ''Rawson's dictionary of Euphemisms'' (1995), attempts to derive ''bloody'' from minced oaths for "by our lady" or "God's blood" are based on the attempt to explain the word's extraordinary shock power in the 18th to 19th centuries, but they disregard that the earliest records of the word as an intensifier in the 17th to early 18th century do not reflect any taboo or profanity. It seems more likely, according to Rawson, that the taboo against the word arose secondarily, perhaps because of an association with menstruation.<ref>"More likely, the taboo stemmed from the fear that many people have of blood and, in the minds of some, from an association with menstrual bleeding. Whatever, the term was debarred from polite society during the whole of the nineteenth century." Rawson (1995).</ref>

The Oxford English Dictionary mentions the theory that it may have arisen from aristocratic rowdies known as "bloods", hence "bloody drunk" means "drunk as a blood".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.lexico.com/definition/bloody|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201101014743/https://www.lexico.com/definition/bloody|url-status=dead|archive-date=1 November 2020|title=Definition of Bloody by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com |website=Lexico Dictionaries English}}</ref>

==History of use== Until at least the early 18th century, the word was used innocuously. It was used as an intensifier without apparent implication of profanity by 18th-century authors such as Henry Fielding and Jonathan Swift ("It was bloody hot walking today" in 1713) and Samuel Richardson ("He is bloody passionate" in 1742).

After about 1750 the word assumed more profane connotations. Johnson (1755) already calls it "very vulgar", and the original Oxford English Dictionary article of 1888 comments the word is "now constantly in the mouths of the lowest classes, but by respectable people considered 'a horrid word', on a par with obscene or profane language".<ref>{{cite book |title=The Oxford English Dictionary. Vol. 1 |date=1933 |publisher=Clarendon Press |location=Oxford |page=933 |quote=2. As an intensive: Very .... and no mistake, exceedingly; abominably, desperately. In general colloquial use from the Restoration to ''c''1750; now constantly in the mouths of the lowest classes, but by respectable people considered 'a horrid word', on a par with obscene or profane language, and usually printed in the newspapers (in police reports, etc.) 'b⸺y'.}}</ref>

On the opening night of George Bernard Shaw's comedy ''Pygmalion'' in 1914, Mrs Patrick Campbell, in the role of Eliza Doolittle, created a sensation with the line "Walk! Not bloody likely!" and this led to a fad for using "Pygmalion" itself as a pseudo-oath, as in "Not Pygmalion likely".<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.channel4.com/apps26/film/reviews/film.jsp?id=106299&section=filmfact |title= My Fair Lady Overview- Read the review |access-date=14 August 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090207103513/http://www.channel4.com/apps26/film/reviews/film.jsp?id=106299&section=filmfact |publisher=Channel 4 (British Television Station)|archive-date=7 February 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-blo1.htm |title=Bloody |publisher=World Wide Words |date=2006-04-01 |access-date=2013-05-24}}</ref>

==Usage outside the UK==

===Australia/New Zealand=== ''Bloody'' has always been a very common part of Australian and New Zealand speech and has not been considered profane there for some time.{{When|date=February 2024}}. The word was dubbed "the Australian adjective" by ''The Bulletin'' on 18 August 1894. One Australian performer, Kevin Bloody Wilson, has even made it his middle name. Also in Australia, the word ''bloody'' is frequently used as a verbal hyphen, or infix, correctly called tmesis as in "fanbloodytastic". In the 1940s an Australian divorce court judge held that "the word ''bloody'' is so common in modern parlance that it is not regarded as swearing". Meanwhile, Neville Chamberlain's government was fining Britons for using the word in public.{{Citation needed|date=April 2011}} In 2007 an Australian advertising campaign So where the bloody hell are you? was banned on UK televisions and billboards as the term was still considered an expletive.

===United States=== The word as an expletive is seldom used in the United States of America. In the US the term is usually used when the intention is to mimic an Englishman. Because it is not perceived as profane in American English, "bloody" is not censored when used in American television and film, for example in the 1961 film ''The Guns of Navarone'' the actor Richard Harris at one point says: "You can't even see the bloody cave, let alone the bloody guns. And anyway, we haven't got a bloody bomb big enough to smash that bloody rock ..." – but ''bloody'' was replaced with ''ruddy'' for British audiences of the time.{{citation needed|date=December 2015}}

===Canada=== The term bloody as an intensifier is at times spoken in some regions of English-speaking Canada, though it remains less frequent than in British or Australian English. It is, however, more commonly heard in Atlantic Canada, particularly in Newfoundland and Labrador, where regional dialects have retained stronger British influences. The word may be regarded as mildly vulgar depending on context and social setting.{{citation needed|date=July 2022}}

===Singapore=== In Singapore, the word ''bloody'' is commonly used as a mild expletive in Singapore's colloquial English. The roots of this expletive derives from the influence and informal language British officers used during the dealing and training of soldiers in the Singapore Volunteer Corps and the early days of the Singapore Armed Forces. When more Singaporeans were promoted officers within the Armed Forces, most new local officers applied similar training methods their former British officers had when they were cadets or trainees themselves. This includes some aspects of British Army lingo, like "bloody (something)". When the newly elected Singapore government implemented compulsory conscription, all 18-year-old able bodied Singapore males had to undergo training within the Armed Forces. When National servicemen completed their service term, some brought the many expletives they picked up during their service into the civilian world and thus became a part of the common culture in the city state.

=== Malaysia === The word "bloody" also managed to spread up north in neighbouring Malaysia, to where the influence of Singapore English has spread. The use of "bloody" as a substitute for more explicit language increased with the popularity of British and Australian films and television shows aired on local television programmes. The term ''bloody'' in Singapore may not be considered explicit, but its usage is frowned upon in formal settings.

===South Africa=== The term is frequently used among White South Africans in their colloquial English and it is an intensifier. It is used in both explicit and non-explicit ways. It also spread to Afrikaans as "blerrie" and is popular amongst many citizens in the country. It is also used by minors and is not considered to be offensive.

===India=== The term is also frequently used as a mild expletive or an intensifier in India.

==Euphemisms== Many substitutions were devised{{year needed|date=November 2015}} to convey the essence of the oath, but with less offence; these included ''bleeding'', ''bleaking'', ''cruddy'', ''smuddy'', ''blinking'', ''blooming'', ''bally'', ''woundy'', '' flaming'' and ''ruddy''.

Publications such as newspapers, police reports, and so on may print ''b⸺y'' instead of the full profanity.<ref name="OED">{{Citation|title=Oxford English Dictionary.}}</ref> A spoken language equivalent is ''blankety'' or, less frequently, ''blanked'' or ''blanky''; the spoken words are all variations of ''blank'', which, as a verbal representation of a dash, is used as a euphemism for a variety of "bad" words.<ref name="OED"/>

==In composition== Use of ''bloody'' as an adverbial or generic intensifier is to be distinguished from its fixed use in the expressions "bloody murder" and "bloody hell". In "bloody murder", it has the original sense of an adjective used literally. The King James Version of the Bible frequently uses ''bloody'' as an adjective in reference to bloodshed or violent crime, as in "bloody crimes" (Ezekiel 22:2), "Woe to the bloody city" (Ezekiel 24:6, Nahum 3:1). "bloody men" (26:9, Psalms 59:2, 139:19), etc. The expression of "bloody murder" goes back to at least Elizabethan English, as in Shakespeare's ''Titus Andronicus'' (c. 1591), "bloody murder or detested rape". The expression "scream bloody murder" (in the figurative or desemanticised sense of "to loudly object to something" attested since c. 1860)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/idioms/scream+bloody+murder |title=Idioms Dictionary - Common Idioms and Phrases in English Language |publisher=Dictionary.reference.com |access-date=2013-05-24}}</ref> is now considered American English, while in British English, the euphemistic "blue murder" had replaced "bloody murder" during the period of "bloody" being considered taboo.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-blu4.htm|title=World Wide Words: Blue murder|website=World Wide Words}}</ref>

The expression "bloody hell" is now used as a general expression of surprise or as a general intensifier; e.g. "bloody hell" being used repeatedly in ''Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone'' (2001, PG Rating). In March 2006 Australia's national tourism commission, Tourism Australia, launched an advertising campaign targeted at potential visitors in several English-speaking countries. The ad sparked controversy because of its ending (in which a cheerful, bikini-clad spokeswoman delivers the ad's call-to-action by saying "...so where the bloody hell are you?"). In the UK the BACC required that a modified version of the ad be shown in the United Kingdom, without the word "bloody".<ref>{{Cite news |first=Fiona |last=Lee Quimby |url=http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/bloody-ad-ban-incredibly-ludicrous/2007/03/28/1174761533507.html|title=Brit ban on 'bloody' ad 'incredibly ludicrous' - Travel |date=28 March 2007|newspaper=Sydney Morning Herald |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160315091147/http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/bloody-ad-ban-incredibly-ludicrous/2007/03/28/1174761533507.html|archive-date=15 March 2016|url-status=dead|access-date=18 March 2018}}</ref> In May 2006 the UK's Advertising Standards Authority ruled that the word ''bloody'' was not an inappropriate marketing tool and the original version of the ad was permitted to air. In Canada, the ad's use of "bloody hell" also created controversy.<ref>{{Cite web |date=March 22, 2006 |last=Nudd |first=Tim |title=Canada is fine with 'bloody,' not with 'hell' |url=https://www.adweek.com/creativity/canada-fine-bloody-not-hell-19289/ |access-date=2022-03-07 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=McArthur |first=Keith |date=2006-03-21 |title=CBC quibbles with risqué Australia ad |language=en-CA |work=The Globe and Mail |url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/cbc-quibbles-with-risque-australia-ad/article18159033/ |access-date=2022-03-07}}</ref>

The longer "bloody hell-hounds" appears to have been at least printable in early 19th century Britain.<ref>so in ''London Theatre: A Collection of the Most Celebrated Dramatic Pieces, Correctly Given, from Copies Used in the Theatres'' Volumes 11-12 (1815), p. 59 "Bloody hell-hounds, I overheard you!"</ref> "Bloody hell's flames" as well as "bloody hell" is reported as a profanity supposedly used by Catholics against Protestants in 1845.<ref> John Ryan, ''Popery unmasked. A narrative of twenty years' Popish persecution'' (1845), p. 44.</ref>

==References== {{Reflist}}

==External links== *[https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4789650.stm BBC News: Australian advert banned on UK TV] *[http://www.oedilf.com/db/Lim.php?LimerickId=455 Limerick that makes reference to the expression "bloody ell"]

Category:British slang Category:Australian slang Category:New Zealand slang Category:English profanity Category:English words Category:Blood