# Can't be asked / Can't be arsed



## James Brandon

A friend of mine raised this issue. This one puzzled me and I double-checked on line and there are differing opinions. One expression would be a variation on the other, but there is no consensus as to which one came first, it seems.

Some people say 'can't be asked' is a decaf version of 'can't be arsed', but other people say that the latter was made up whereas the former was the original one.

'Can't be arsed' is BE.

Insight welcome. Thanks

PS I have checked the dictionary but the expression does not seem to be included. 
----------

_If I would not do anything (as opposed to something), regardless of who asked me to do it (you, or you, or you), then I truly *can't* be asked.' Apparently in the 1990s people changed it to *arsed* and it just kind of stuck. My best friend says asked, I say *arsed*.10 Feb 2009_

*Can't be arsed vs. Can't be asked - The Student Room*
www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=811879

_https://www.google.co.uk/#q=he+can%27t+be+arsed_


----------



## JulianStuart

Can't be arsed - assed? (BrE vs. [pseudo-]AmE)
Can't be arsed/bothered + infinitive/gerund

If you think you will achieve clarity on the origin(al spelling) of this expression, you have another think coming


----------



## James Brandon

Thanks and will read the other threads with interest !


----------



## James Brandon

I have now read in full the other 2 threads, but they don't actually answer my question, because they do not focus on what my question is about. My question is about 'can't be arsed' Vs 'can't be asked'.

One thread is about 'can't be arsed' and possible American usage, and it is confirmed 'can't be assed' is not used by Americans, as a matter of fact (since in AE 'ass' is used instead of 'arse' to refer in vulgar fashion to a person's backside). 'Can't be arsed' is clearly a British English phrase, also found in Commonwealth countries such as Australia. One unexpected twist is a NZ contributor who says that, in New Zealand, they say 'can't be assed' (meaning 'can't be arsed'), thus spelling it with 'ass' for 'arse', even though Americans would not use the phrase.

The other thread is about the verb pattern following the phrase, i.e. gerund or infinitive, and it seems to me that both are possible and no clear answer was given to the Italian contributor. Cf: 'I can't be arsed to do it' Vs 'I can't be arsed [with] doing it'.

Various forums discuss the matter I have raised, such as this one: _The original phrase "can't be asked', meaning one lacks motivation to act, was corrupted in the late 1990's to "can't be arsed". Both phrases are valid and remain in common usage. (2012) 

Is the phrase can't be asked or can't be ars*d? in The AnswerBank: Phrases & Sayings_

So, if anyone has any idea regarding my query, which does come up in Google searches as a language issue, please let us know. Thanks.


----------



## JulianStuart

James Brandon said:


> I have now read in full the other 2 threads, but they don't actually answer my question, because they do not focus on what my question is about. My question is about 'can't be arsed' Vs 'can't be asked'.
> 
> One thread is about 'can't be arsed' and possible American usage, and it is confirmed 'can't be assed' is not used by Americans, as a matter of fact (since in AE 'ass' is used instead of 'arse' to refer in vulgar fashion to a person's backside). 'Can't be arsed' is clearly a British English phrase, also found in Commonwealth countries such as Australia. One unexpected twist is a NZ contributor who says that, in New Zealand, they say 'can't be assed' (meaning 'can't be arsed'), thus spelling it with 'ass' for 'arse', even though Americans would not use the phrase.
> 
> The other thread is about the verb pattern following the phrase, i.e. gerund or infinitive, and it seems to me that both are possible and no clear answer was given to the Italian contributor. Cf: 'I can't be arsed to do it' Vs 'I can't be arsed [with] doing it'.
> 
> So, if anyone has any idea regarding my query, which does come up in Google searches as a language issue, please let us know. Thanks.


They may not answer your (very) specific question but they may represent a large part of the discussion of the phrases you can find on-line  If "can't be asked" were used much, it would probably have shown up in those discussions, but it does not.  That was part of the reason to read them


----------



## James Brandon

Well, that's one way of answering the question. The possibility remains that 'can't be asked' would have been the original phrase that was changed to 'can't be arsed' for effet at some stage. Personally, I don't know whether that is the case or not, but several contributors on those other forums seem to believe it (and they quote the 1990s as the inflexion point). 'Can't be arsed' would have the advantage that it is more striking and more forceful, as it were...


----------



## Truffula

From what I can tell from a cursory search, it's that "can't be arsed" is the original, but was sincerely mistakenly understood as " can't be asked" and used that way, so both exist now, with the former being the original and mostly British version.  The British version has apparently become shortened to "CBA" and then "ceebs" according to a slang dictionary reference I found.

No references to "can't be asked" used this way were found in my various searches.  The fact that "can't be arsed" is used in some ways where "can't be asked" would not make sense (see the "ing" forms mentioned here:  Eggcorn Forum / "Can't be asked" for "can't be arsed" for examples) makes it seem very unlikely to me that "can't be asked" is the original...  I'd ask them to show usage before 1990 of the "can't be asked" in this sense, rather than literally as in "this question can't be asked at an interview" or something if they want to assert that.  Some claims that "can't be arsed" was used in the 1960s exist but I'm just as skeptical of those...


----------



## Hermione Golightly

I am not at all familiar with 'I can't be asked!' meaning 'I can't be bothered!'.
Until I got on-line about 20 years ago I wouldn't have known 'I can't be arsed!' because I was living abroad and on the whole not talking to the sort of British people who would dream of using 'arse' 'in polite company'.
It was a completely taboo word, at least for women, and still is in the sense I'd be careful about using it. Not that I'm at all shocked by the word itself, you understand.

If 'I can't be asked' did ever exist, it would have to be used only by speakers of southern BE varieties who pronounce 'ask' like 'arsk', so they'd be using 'asked' as a sound-alike euphemism for 'arsed'.
It would make no sense for northern BE speakers like me who say 'ask' like 'assk'.
In my day, we'd say "I can't be bloody-well bothered!" or maybe, more recently "I can't be effing bothered", or/and change 'bothered' to cockney 'bovvered'.

I don't really know or use these terms other than reactive exclamations.


----------



## JustKate

Hermione Golightly said:


> I am not at all familiar with 'I can't be asked!' meaning 'I can't be bothered!'.


I've never heard it either. If I did ever hear anybody say this, I'd take it literally to mean "It is not possible to ask me." And that's not really very close to the "can't be arsed" meaning.


----------



## DonnyB

Well, I'd _never_ heard it said as "Can't be asked" before I read this thread, in fact.  I tend to use "Can't be arsed" and hear it used, as a standalone rather than as a construction with a gerund or a following infinitive, but I imagine you could use either.  "Can't be arsed _with it_" is also a possibility.

Grammatically it appears to be a passive infinitive of the verb "to arse", which I see Oxford Dictionaries has found two other usages of: "to arse around/about" and "to arse something up".


----------



## suzi br

Hermione Golightly said:


> I am not at all familiar with 'I can't be asked!' meaning 'I can't be bothered!'.


Neither am I! It just doesn't work for me.

But then, having been involved in the thread that Julian refers to (another think coming) I am used to complete bafflement at what strange things other people seem to whole-heartedly believe.

"to arse" as a verb only appears in the OED as "arse about".  They have an entry dating back to 1664 for that.  It means to "fool about" which is not quite the same as making an effort (or not making an effort) but close enough. 

Usually the namby-pamby versions of any swearing phrase derives from the vulgar one, not the other way around.  It is logical, even if not etymological.


----------



## James Brandon

OK, so the consensus view here appears to be that it is the opposite of what various people claim on other forums I have seen, i.e. that 'can't be asked' came first, and it would be 'can't be arsed' that was the original phrase, misinterpreted as 'can't be asked' along the way. 'Can't be asked' would not be totally absurd: 'I can't be asked to do it', as in, 'Don't ask me [to do it] because I have no intention of doing it' -- but it is true that the construction would, then, have to be with the infinitive. 'Can't be bothered' is, similarly, followed by the infinitive ('he couldn't be bothered to answer the phone') in every case, I believe.


----------



## ElGladiador

James Brandon said:


> and it is confirmed 'can't be assed' is not used by Americans, as a matter of fact (since in AE 'ass' is used instead of 'arse' to refer in vulgar fashion to a person's backside). 'Can't be arsed' is clearly a British English phrase, also found in Commonwealth countries such as Australia.



I've heard countless Americans say "can't be assed". In fact, I was surprised to find out that Britain/Commonwealth countries used the term (albeit using "arse") since I figured it was probably an Americanism given how many times I heard it during my childhood back in the dark ages before the internet.


----------



## JustKate

I've never heard even one American say that, ElGladiador. The AmE equivalent of _arsed_ is _assed_, not _asked, _and, at least in my experience, _assed_ just isn't used this way in AmE.


----------



## ElGladiador

I've lived my entire life in Tennessee, so perhaps it's just a Southern thing or perhaps someone way back when came over here (West Tennessee) from Britain and imported the phrase locally and over countless decades it became a common saying around these parts. So, to clarify my original comment, it doesn't appear to be a common American saying from what you and others are saying, but it is at least common in Tennessee.


----------



## JustKate

ElGladiador said:


> I've lived my entire life in Tennessee, so perhaps it's just a Southern thing or perhaps someone way back when came over here (West Tennessee) from Britain and imported the phrase locally and over countless decades it became a common saying around these parts. So, to clarify my original comment, it doesn't appear to be a common American saying from what you and others are saying, but it is at least common in Tennessee.


That's certainly a possibility. I am confident it's not common, but that's not the same thing as saying it's unheard of.


----------



## ElGladiador

If you ever get the chance, look up the documentary Mountain Talk (2004). It's about the unique dialect of English spoken in Appalachia, and it makes frequent reference to phrases/idioms that are in common currency in Britain but unheard of in America except for Appalachia. This conversation just reminded me of the documentary.


----------



## ewie

DonnyB said:


> Well, I'd _never_ heard it said as "Can't be asked" before I read this thread, in fact.


Me neither.


suzi br said:


> Usually the namby-pamby versions of any swearing phrase derives from the vulgar one, not the other way around.


I'm reasonably (44%) sure that it can work both ways.  My reasonably educated (44%) guess is that this one went: _can't be bothered > can't be buggered > can't be arsed.
_
(I'm also willing to bet a nice meaty £5 note that _can't be arsed_ has been around a lot longer than 20 years, given that _arse_ itself has been around for 1,000.)


----------



## JustKate

ElGladiador said:


> If you ever get the chance, look up the documentary Mountain Talk (2004). It's about the unique dialect of English spoken in Appalachia, and it makes frequent reference to phrases/idioms that are in common currency in Britain but unheard of in America except for Appalachia. This conversation just reminded me of the documentary.


I've not seen that particular documentary, but I have read about the BE-Appalachia link.


----------



## Trochfa

I've only ever heard "can't be arsed".


----------



## suzi br

ewie said:


> Me neither.
> 
> I'm reasonably (44%) sure that it can work both ways.  My reasonably educated (44%) guess is that this one went: _can't be bothered > can't be buggered > can't be arsed.
> _
> (I'm also willing to bet a nice meaty £5 note that _can't be arsed_ has been around a lot longer than 20 years, given that _arse_ itself has been around for 1,000.)


Your use of numbers adds an air of scientific authority I can but admire. 

Now I'll grant you swearing can evolve from everyday things getting more vulgar, but lots of the old ones were blasphemy modified to smooth out obvious biblical refs in times when blasphemy was a serious offence
e.g. Zounds=God's wounds


In modern times mum used lots of everyday words to slide over more robust options, which is what I suspect when the sounds are so close

sugar=shit
Armhole=arsehole 
(Admittedly my mum is the only person I ever heard saying this!)


----------



## James Brandon

It is fair to say that a lot of mild-sounding expressions are decaf versions of rude ones (e.g.: 'cor blimey' = 'God, blind me!'). In this particular case, the consensus view appears to be, however, that the correct expression is 'can't be arsed' and the other one ('can't be asked') would be a re-interpretation, _ex-post._

The usage issue is also pretty clear: the expression is clearly BE, hence also Australian. One NZ contributor said it is 'can't be assed' in NZ; only one American contributor said he is familiar with the phrase, spelt 'assed' since 'arse' is spelt 'ass' in US English -- see above, on the local form of English spoken in the Appalachians and Tennessee.

It would be interesting to have an idea as to how old or recent 'can't be arsed', as a phrase, is.


----------



## PaulQ

To *arse *and to *ass *seem to contemporaneous and are recorded in the OED as 17th century:

*to ass*: 2. intr. To act the ass. Now freq. in (orig. schoolboys') slang: to fool about.
1647   N. Ward Simple Cobler Aggawam 48   To keep their Kings from Divelizing, and themselves from Assing.

*to arse*: to arse about, around, to ‘mess around’, fool about. (Cf. ass v. 2) slang.
1664   C. Cotton Scarronides 9   Arsing about.

Interestingly, *ask*, in certain British accents, is often pronounced "ass'ed" - I suspect that this is where the confusion (intentional or not) arose.


----------



## Trochfa

I think it could be reasonably old, as I believe it is simply a contraction of:

"*I can't be* bothered to get up off my *arse* to do it".

to

"*I can't be arse**d*".


----------



## James Brandon

So, like the word 'arse' itself, the phrase would be very old (mid-17th C.). Having said this, and without meaning to split hairs, if 'to arse about' is known to have existed since 1664, it does not mean 'I can't be arsed' has existed since 1664. It is a different expression and one would need to find a 1st mention in a written/ printed work of some sort, which is, itself, not 100% reliable, in fact (often, a phrase will pre-date its 1st mention in writing).

When I did a quick search on line, all the commentators appeared to assume 'can't be arsed' was a recent expression and a distortion of 'can't be asked', i.e. the opposite of what this Thread has established. This is even the interpretation Google serves up tops, as the preferred view on the matter.


----------



## pickarooney

There are other variants, such as "can't be bothered', "couldn't be f%*ked" or "I couldn't be bollocksed" in common use, though I guess these were adapted from "can't/couldn't be arsed" rather than the other way around. However, for me it's a clear indication that "can't be asked" is just... not a real thing


----------



## Andygc

The first occurrence in the Google Books database is 1978 in _The Beatles_ by Hunter Davies





> If they can't be arsed awaiting for me, I can't be arsed going after them.


There is only a snippet view, so I can't tell which Beatle said it. The fragment of context suggests that it was Paul. I was certainly familiar with the expression before then. The suggestion at the link in the OP that "asked" became "arsed" in the 90s is arrant nonsense. But then, I don't suppose the writer had been alive and talking very much before the 90s.



James Brandon said:


> When I did a quick search on line, all the commentators appeared to assume 'can't be arsed' was a recent expression and a distortion of 'can't be asked', i.e. the opposite of what this Thread has established. This is even the interpretation Google serves up tops, as the preferred view on the matter.


Odd. A quick search online for "can't be asked" takes me immediately to places where people write that they've never heard "can't be asked" or say that it's an error. I can find no justification for your claim.


----------



## James Brandon

When I first looked, I found several people thought 'can't be asked' had been re-formulated as 'can't be arsed'; I never said I believed it to be the case or that it was accurate -- hence this query. You do find other forums and websites stating the opposite, indeed, such as this one:-

Urban Dictionary: Cant Be Asked

_Used by some Southern UK speakers in place of __can't be arsed__ because they misheard it, or want to be more polite._

The Beatles quote is interesting in terms of the use of the gerund (cf. other Thread on this issue).


----------



## Andygc

Yes, "used in place of". In other words "arsed" came first. I don't understand why you comment about the gerund, "I can't be arsed doing something" is a normal construction.


----------



## James Brandon

If you read one of the other 2 threads, the original contributor, from Italy, asked whether the gerund or the infinitive should be used after 'can't be arsed' ('I can't be arsed to do X' V 'I can't be arsed doing X'). There was no clear consensus, as I recall.


----------



## Andygc

That's right. They are both unremarkable. That's why I was somewhat surprised that you thought the use of the gerund interesting.


----------



## Edinburgher

If you pronounce "arsed" with a non-rhotic accent, its sounds almost indistinguishable from "asked" (in which the 'k' is generally not articulated).
That must be why some people (particularly those who do not expect to be hearing vulgar terms) misinterpret the former as the latter.


----------



## london calling

I am not familiar with the 'asked' version at all.  I'd think it a mistake if I head it.  I confess however  to using the 'arsed' version (much to my dear mama's horror ).


----------



## JulianStuart

Edinburgher said:


> If you pronounce "arsed" with a non-rhotic accent, its sounds almost indistinguishable from "asked" (in which the 'k' is generally not articulated).
> That must be why some people (particularly those who do not expect to be hearing vulgar terms) misinterpret the former as the latter.



And ultimately led us, via questions on the web that show up in a search for the "asked" version, to this thread


----------



## Hermione Golightly

There's non-rhotic and there's non-rhotic, isn't there?

Several million non-rhotics say 'assked' not 'arsked', although of course they say 'arse' when they mean 'backside' and only use 'ass' for the animal. Those northern people have no problem distinguishing between the two sounds. Why would they decide that 'I can't be arsed' must mean 'I can't be _assked, _which makes little sense anyway.
One _could_ argue that I can't be bothered/buggared (which I'd forgotten) make little sense but they do:
"I care so little that I can't put myself to the trouble" or "I care so little I'd rather be buggared", than go to the bother (of doing something). "I can't be arsed" is _immediately_ understandable in context even if you're not familiar with the expression.
"I can't be asked!" is senseless in this context, to RP ('received pronunciation') speakers in the south and even more senseless to northern English who aren't confused anyway. It invites a literal response like "Nobody was asking you!".

For example, you're telling a friend about how the bus you were on stopped suddenly, throwing you to the floor. Your friend asks if you have complained to the bus company. "I can't be asked/assked" would be a ridiculous response. It would sound like a strange passive form of 'Don't ask me'.
⟨ʔ⟩
I have no idea how many 'assked' northern speakers  ever say 'ass⟨ʔ⟩t'. I feel there might be  a form of glottal stop introduced to distinguish between 'ass⟨ʔ⟩d' and 'asst' (which isn't a word).
As a non-rhotic northern English speaker I don't know how to phonetically convey exactly how I pronounce 'asked'. It's not 'arsked', 'asst' or 'akst'.


----------



## James Brandon

To go back briefly to the question of gerund Vs infinitive (above), the reason I flagged it was that, in the other Thread, this was discussed at some length, and opinions differed as to whether it should (or would usually) be one or the other. I am quite prepared to agree that both are in use and sound Ok.

I agree that the issue of pronunciation would come into it: phonetically, at any rate with the way certain people pronounce 'arsed' and 'asked', there would be room for confusion, and this may have led to the query in the first place, i.e. people wondering whether it is one or the other, and trying to rationalize the use of one or the other. I am not from the north of England, and it is entirely conceivable that, in that part of the UK, the phonetic confusion would never arise in the first place.


----------



## suzi br

My own synopsis, based on about 3 minutes browsing is that the "asked" version is NOT a thing apart from in a few language forums, which this one has now added to.  

If you search for either phrase plus memes you get loads of visuals for "can't be arsed" because it IS  phrase that people know and make up images about.  The other draws a blank, no memes using the phrase = no currency!


----------



## James Brandon

I have not checked the 'memes'. But there are various forums/ websites where people discuss the 2 phrases, which would tend to indicate that some people have wondered which one it is, or have used (or heard) one Vs the other... But you are right and, from what I have seen, most commentators seem to confirm that the correct phrase is indeed 'can't be arsed'.

Google


----------



## suzi br

The "discussion" is self-perpetuating.  We are doing it, and referring to the others, but they are drops in the ocean of actual language use.


----------



## James Brandon

I was interested in the issue because it cropped up and I found other people had asked themselves the same question, that's all. If no one ever used 'can't be asked' (and one may agree that this is indeed wrong, on balance), there would be no confusion, hence there would be no discussion on line on this topic. This Thread could be deemed useful in that it clarifies the origin of the phrase and the way that it is used. But it is obvious that, the more you discuss something on line -- anything -- the more prominence you give to it, rightly or wrongly.

At the end of the day, no one is forcing anyone to take part!  Abstaining from propagating a phrase or notion one disapproves of is always an option one can choose.

In effect, one is moving away from a discussion of the substance of the case to a discussion of the methodology... I was interested in scope, usage, origin, etc., not in the methodological issue _per se,_ personally.


----------



## suzi br

I think we've pretty  much answered your question: very little scope or usage for "cant be asked" as an idiom for can't be bothered.   I think the origin is fated to be shrouded in mystery.  

I don't think I was drifting to methodology, I was very clearly on "scope and usage".  
Q. Where do we find it?  
A. Not many places and mostly, on line, the places are the very thing itself being discussed.


----------



## James Brandon

I believe people discuss it or have discussed it on line because they have heard it, or have felt unsure what the correct phrase was. After that, discussing the issue on line does increase occurrences, at any rate in the 'virtual' world, with a potential impact in the 'real' world, but it seems to me that those people who discuss it do not discuss it because they have seen it on line but because they have come across it in real life, or have wondered about it in real life -- if you are going to think about it in chicken V egg terms. In other words, it is not the internet that has created the phrase(s), but confusion around the phrase(s) that has generated the online presence of the said phrase(s), which in turn may amplify the use of the said phrase(s).

E.g.: This discussion on line goes back to 2005.

Is the phrase can't be asked or can't be ars*d? in The AnswerBank: Phrases & Sayings

Some of the contributors say that they always thought it was 'can't be asked', and the consensus view is indeed that 'can't be arsed' is the correct form. Some people indicate that they use one form, or the other, or both in real life -- rightly or wrongly, as it were. This isn't just an online-forum language issue, as it were. (Cf also the other 2 threads on this forum, to the effect that people are simply asking themselves questions in relation to the use of specific phrases, what is accepted use and what is not, etc.)

I had actually read this (above) before posting up my query on this forum, and I did because I thought some contributors would be able to shed more light on it and come up with extra insight that would be interesting, which I think they have.


----------



## Andygc

You started by giving us a sourceless quotation - ie sourceless in the thread where you found it: 





> I was bugged by this and found a thread about it elsewhere. One person said this:
> 
> 'My understanding .......
> 
> Apparently in the 1990s people changed it to *arsed* and it just kind of stuck.


That sourceless quotation is easily refuted by using Google's advanced search (so that you can limit the date range) for the text "can't be arsed" in books. Most people in Britain who had reached adult life before 1980 would also be well aware that this 1990s claim was rubbish, but couldn't be arsed with making a Google search for something so blindingly obvious. I almost didn't bother, but I thought I had better produce evidence to put this nonsensical claim to bed. I'd just point out that the appearance of the phrase in a quotation of colloquial speech in a book in 1978 is actually evidence that the phrase is appreciably older.

By the way


suzi br said:


> Q. Where do we find it?
> A. Not many places and mostly, on line, the places are the very thing itself being discussed.





James Brandon said:


> This discussion on line goes back to 2005.


Yes, you are rather demonstrating suzi's point.


----------



## James Brandon

All I am saying is that some people out there are or were confused about the correct phrase, hence various forums (including this one) discussing it, in order to clarify usage, which is what many of those forums are about and do, including this one, I believe. What is 'blindingly obvious' to one person may not be to another.

The initial online source I quoted, called The Student Room, is an online forum not dissimilar to this one: it is not a 'sourceless' reference. There is a source. That source is the online forum in question, which one may recognise as of interest or not, but then the same scepticism could apply to, say, Wikipedia, etc.

Take the word 'die' (plural, 'dice'): it is 'blindingly obvious' to most native speakers of English in the UK that one should say 'a dice', and I have seen it in print, also in textbooks for the learning of English intended for schoolchildren in this country (Britain). And yet, according to all British dictionaries I have seen, the correct form for the singular, never used or recognised by most native speakers in the UK, is 'die', not 'dice'. This is an example of confusion that can warrant an online or off-line discussion. And, no doubt, there would be arguments for/against one usage or the other... Such is life.


----------



## PaulQ

I cannot help thinking that the place for such discussions is Etymology, History of languages, and Linguistics (EHL)


----------



## James Brandon

Well, I think the matter has been covered and there is not much to be added: readers of this Thread will make up their own mind as to its relevance and its use, or otherwise.  Over 300 apparently, by the latest count, so there is a surprising amount of interest out there...


----------



## PaulQ

Unfortunately, "interest" isn't one of the criteria.


----------



## James Brandon

I would have thought it was better if there was _*some *_interest and/or the discussion was interesting, but maybe there is something I have missed entirely. And I would have hoped relevance was indeed part of the criteria.


----------



## PaulQ

James Brandon said:


> but maybe there is something I have missed entirely.


 You are asking for the etymology.


----------



## James Brandon

I was asking about the origin of the phrase, that's correct, but also its relevance and its usage. In practice, it is difficult to analyse a phrase and comment on its usage if you do not know where it is coming from: in other words, current usage stems to a large extent from historical considerations. I do not think you can separate the two, actually, and even though few dictionaries pay attention to the etymology of words. In other words, there is a false dichotomy here.


----------



## Cwej

In my view this is very particular to people from certain cultural backgrounds in the UK. I teach in an inner London school and kids from Caribbean backgrounds tend to pronounce asked similar to this: ‘arksed’ rather than ‘arsked’ with the k and s sounds reversed.

Similarly it is students from Caribbean backgrounds that tend to say ‘I can’t be asked’ rather than ‘I can’t be arsed’, the error coming from mishearing the correct word, because when you swap the k and s sounds ‘asked’ and ‘arsed’ sound almost indistinguishable.


----------



## Truffula

Citation of "can't be arsed" in a book (seems to be from the 1978 edition, book was originally published in 1968) - The Beatles by Hunter Davies:

"If they *can't be arsed* awaiting for me, I *can't be arsed* going after them.  So I sat down and watched telly."  This is a quotation from Paul McCartney explaining what he'd said in an event (I think in the 1960s) to Brian Epstein when Paul had decided he should be rebellious and was bathing when the rest of the band came to pick him up.  

This is reasonable evidence that the expression "can't be arsed" was in use in the 1960s, I think.

https://www.amazon.com/Beatles-Hunter-Davies/dp/0393315711/

They also use "couldn't be arsed" in that book. John Lennon said, "I like _A Day in the Life_, but it's still not half as nice as I thought it was when we were doing it. I suppose we could have worked harder on it. But I *couldn't be arsed* doing any more."

EDIT: Andygc already quoted this book (in post #27 above) but was only able to get a snippet view of it.  I was able to find the book and verify who said it, the original publication date, and add longer quotes.  I hope it is still useful.


----------



## Andygc

Truffula said:


> Citation of "can't be arsed" in a book (seems to be from the 1978 edition, book was originally published in 1968) - The Beatles by Hunter Davies:





Andygc said:


> The first occurrence in the Google Books database is 1978 in _The Beatles_ by Hunter Davies


That was post 27.


----------



## ewie

Cwej said:


> In my view this is very particular to people from certain cultural backgrounds in the UK. I teach in an inner London school and kids from Caribbean backgrounds tend to pronounce asked similar to this: ‘arksed’ rather than ‘arsked’ with the k and s sounds reversed.
> 
> Similarly it is students from Caribbean backgrounds that tend to say ‘I can’t be asked’ rather than ‘I can’t be arsed’, the error coming from mishearing the correct word, because when you swap the k and s sounds ‘asked’ and ‘arsed’ sound almost indistinguishable.


At last! a *source*!

Welcome to the forum, Cwej


----------



## PaulQ

I doubt the Caribbean influence. The South Welsh (Cardiff/Swansea) have a similar way of saying a*ks*ed instead of a*sk*ed, and, like the Caribbean version, the "a" is not a long "a".

That the first known example so far was from the Beatles tends to indicate that the saying originated in Liverpool as a comic phrase.

Think abiogenesis rather than evolution...


----------



## Mightymooses

I've lived my whole life thinking it was "asked" and that "arsed" was just a more vulgar version (like varying degrees of what the heck/hell/f**k). It never occurred to me that some people think the asked version doesnt exist as its what I've always used and heard people use. After seeing arsed used on Facebook I googled it on a whim to find out which came first/ was correct. So to those claiming no-one says it so no threads are needed discussing it, speak for yourself.


----------



## suzi br

Mightymooses said:


> I've lived my whole life thinking it was "asked" and that "arsed" was just a more vulgar version (like varying degrees of what the heck/hell/f**k). It never occurred to me that some people think the asked version doesnt exist as its what I've always used and heard people use. After seeing arsed used on Facebook I googled it on a whim to find out which came first/ was correct. So to those claiming no-one says it so no threads are needed discussing it, speak for yourself.



Speak for ourselves is exactly what we do do in these discussion threads. You fished this up to tell us to express our own experiences in our own words -  why you could be arsed to do it is a mystery to me.


----------



## heypresto

I was going to say something similar, but I couldn't be arsed.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

Let's discuss then! It would be interesting to know how many decades your experience covers and what part of the realm your experience is in, as well as what exactly you mean by saying "Can't be arsed!"

It isn't used as an expletive like 'Hell!' or 'Fuck!' but as an emphatic way of saying "Can't be bothered" or "I've no time for that!". That's my experience of it, at least. I was cut off from English popular culture for many years, as a young/older adult, but I'm sure I didn't know of it in the 50's or 60's, including time at university in the south. I'm pretty sure that if it had been in use then, I would have heard it there!


----------



## Edinburgher

It may be worth noting that OED's first cited example is from 1988, not picking up on the Beatles reference mentioned here, but it's only 10 years out.
 


> *Draft additions June 2001*
> * trans. (in pass.). slang (chiefly Brit. and Irish English). To be willing to make the required effort; to be bothered. Usu. in negative constructions, such as can't be arsed (to do something).*





> 1988  G. Patterson _Burning your Own_ vii. 88  Don't forget who it was who organized the building of all this when you were too sulky to be arsed doing anything.
> 1991  _Face_ Feb. 34/2  No one else could be arsed doing it, mine was the only phone number anyone had, so I had to make a lot of decisions and I made a lot of wrong ones.
> 1992  _New Musical Express_ 12 Sept. 1  Sources close to the ‘artiste’ suggest the decision to cancel the tour was not made for glamorous or newsworthy reasons..just that he can't be arsed.
> 1995  _Mojo_ Jan. 58/1  He's not really arsed if Cigarettes & Alcohol is T.Rex. Doesn't care.
> 2000  _Minx_ Aug. 95/1  If you really weren't bothered about the bloke, you wouldn't be sufficiently arsed to cop off with him in the first place.


As to where this came from, the obvious derivation {agreeing with #24} is "I can't be bothered to get off my arse to do (whatever it is)".
But it may well have been aided and abetted by a connection with asking {disagreeing with rejections of this idea such as in #9}, because if you can't be bothered to do something, then there would be little point in asking you to do it, hence "you can't be asked to do it".


----------



## suzi br

heypresto said:


> I was going to say something similar, but I couldn't be arsed.


----------



## Trochfa

Right. Searching for the original quote by the Beatles has led me to find that the book _The Beatles: The Authorised Biography _by Hunter Davies was published in *September 1968*.

The Beatles: The Authorised Biography - Wikipedia

Paul was having a bath and they wouldn't wait for him:
"So I said fuck them, temperamental fool that I was. If they can't be arsed waiting for me, I can't be arsed going after them."
The Beatles

It was presumably in existence at the very latest when the book was actually written i.e. before September 1968.


----------



## heypresto

I can't believe McCartney could ever have come up with something as useful as this.


----------



## Trochfa

heypresto said:


> I can't believe McCartney could ever have come up with something as useful as this.


  

Personally, I thought it was one of those sayings that have been around "forever". It appears, at least to me, that he was just naturally using a long existent phrase in a way that a huge audience would instantly understand and relate to.

[Credit obviously goes to Andy (post#27) for providing the quote in the first place.]


----------



## James Brandon

I think it is fair enough that some people would imagine it was 'I can't be asked', as in, 'Don't ask me because I will say no'. It would make sense linguistically, i.e. a shift in emphasis (Don't ask me => I can be asked but it's no => I can't be asked.) 

Having said that, it is clear the expression is with 'arsed' in actual fact. I have not re-read the whole Thread but I do not remember that anyone had mentioned the Beatles / 1968 origin. I also imagined the expression (with 'arsed') to have been around forever. 

I think Edinburgher, who _can_ be 'arsed' to re-consider the question, it seems, has got it right with his explanation: 
_As to where this came from, the obvious derivation {agreeing with #24} is "I can't be bothered to get off my arse to do (whatever it is)". But it may well have been aided and abetted by a connection with asking {disagreeing with rejections of this idea such as in #9}, because if you can't be bothered to do something, then there would be little point in asking you to do it, hence "you can't be asked to do it"._


----------



## Trochfa

I can see how "they can't be asked" etc might work but my main problem is with "I can't be asked" because it can't be satisfactorily used about yourself, whereas "I can't be arsed can". If someone else is asking you to do something then it works, but not if you chose not to do something for yourself.

e.g. _I was going to read my football magazine, but now I can't be asked. 
_
(Problem: Why would you be asking yourself to read _your own_ football magazine when you've already decided that you don't want to read it? Or, if you are meant to be asked the question by someone else, why would _they_ be asking _you_ to read your _own_ football magazine?)

However:

_I was going to read my football magazine, but now I can't be arsed._

makes perfect sense. I now can't be bothered [to get up off my arse] to pick it up and read it.

You might think you could say that "I can't be arsed" doesn't work in cases where you literally don't need to get up off your behind. But we have already established that the phrase was being used in the 1960's if not earlier, and of course in Britain work computers didn't exist then in the form and quantity they do today, and home computers hadn't been invented at that time and also TV remote controls etc, weren't widely used until probably the 1970s or 1980s, and so people literally did have to get up off their behinds every time they wanted to change the TV channel, alter the volume or put another record on the turntable. My point is that unlike today where you can do many things just by sitting on your rear and pushing a button, those things weren't widely possible in Britain in the 1960s.

Your _arse_ mattered more then because you certainly had to use it more! 

I seem to remember using the "arsed" version at school in the late 1970s and at university in the early 1980s. We certainly knew that it wasn't new then. I never heard the "asked" version then.

Well, we now have a proven example of usage from the 1960s of "arsed" and I think we now need to try to find the earliest evidence possible for the usage of "asked" in this context.

[Cross-posted]


----------



## James Brandon

Fair enough and 'arsed' wins while 'asked' loses: I had said as much. I was merely dwelling on the confusion and why it could occur. The fact a misheard phrase may or may not work in a given situation does not mean it will not be used: language -- particularly in its idiomatic and familiar versions -- is not a scientific process, as I think we all agree. 

As to the origin, I do not know but find it odd it would date back to 1968 and not earlier, when the word 'arse' has been around in the English language for a very long time, as pointed out by one contributor earlier. 

PS I like the idea that one's 'arse' matters less now that we have remote controls and wireless devices: a profound thought worth pondering. One wouldn't want one's 'arse' to become entirely secondary in one's life due to developments in high-tech, if only for the principle, I suppose.


----------



## Truffula

Has anyone yet cited the Keith Jarrett interview in Rolling Stone here:

Keith Jarrett's Keys to the Cosmos

In this 1979 dateline article, Keith Jarrett is quoted as follows:

"The sole thing I'm doing is growing more sensitive, and also more subject to destruction, so it has to be protected. There are things now that* I can't be asked *to do that maybe five years ago I would, not because I'm getting more eccentric or arrogant, but because the process requires more consciousness, more tuning. Everything gets fussier and purer... You know, it's funny, but death hovers around quite a bit at a solo concert."

So he is clearly using "I can't be asked" to mean "I can't be bothered."  And that is pretty close time-wise to the citation of the 1978 version of the book that Andy and I found for "can't be arsed" too.  I suspect the confusion/both versions is pretty much as old as the phrase, and Keith Jarrett (born 1945) is about the same age as the Beatles, too, though from the other side of the Atlantic.


----------



## James Brandon

Well, an interesting new twist! Proponents of the notion that 'I can't be asked' has no validity whatsoever may want to comment. 

The consensus view still seems to be that the expression generally used is 'I can't be arsed'. 

K Jarrett hadn't had the benefit of reading this Thread when he was interviewed...


----------



## suzi br

Hmm 
And maybe the editors don’t like ARSE in their magazine so they spell it with a K. 

The careless sprinkling of 4 letter words we get in modern media was not so common in the 1970s.


----------



## Edinburgher

Truffula said:


> In this 1979 dateline article, Keith Jarrett is quoted


Ah, but KJ didn't write it, he said it, and was probably misquoted by the journalist.
Or, as suzi, with whom this is crossposted, suggests, the journalist was overruled by the editor.


----------



## Trochfa

We found that the Beatles book Andy quoted was actually first published in September 1968 and reprinted later several times. In the introduction to the later edition I posted it says:
_*The bulk of the book is how it was then, fresh from their mouths, unchanged, unvarnished, a record of what they were thinking and doing in the 1960s and how they got there.* It's now looked upon as what's called "a primary source"... . *I've resisted the temptation to rewrite or change the original book, polish and burnish it* with the benefit of hindsight, which of course, would make us all cleverer and smarter than we were at the time. 

*But here, at the beginning of the book I have added new material *trying to bring their story roughly up to date and reflect recent events, and also to explain how I got to write the book in the first place.
The Beatles_

We now have "arsed" Sep 1968 and "asked" Jan 1979. (It's interesting that Keith Jarrett adds an additional American twist.)



suzi br said:


> Hmm
> And maybe the editors don’t like ARSE in their magazine so they spell it with a K.
> 
> The careless sprinkling of 4 letter words we get in modern media was not so common in the 1970s.


 
That's a very relevant point Suzi.

[Cross-posted with Edinburgher, who also makes a relevant and interesting comment.]


----------



## James Brandon

Many people think -- mistakenly, it would appear -- that 'asked' is the polite form or the decaf form for 'arsed', precisely. Contributors to this Thread have argued, in the main, that the correct form is indeed 'arsed' -- and 'asked' has no place.


----------



## Trochfa

Well, here's an interesting slant.

_Trotty's Wedding Tour, and Story Book_ published in 1873 and written by Elizabeth Stuart Phelps Ward (an early feminist American author).
Elizabeth Stuart Phelps Ward - Wikipedia

The minister says to Trotty and Nita who have just been divorced on a stone wall (don't ask! ):
_"*You can both* two of you *marry again.*_"...
_So Trotty, Nita and Nate got down from the stone wall (with some difficulty), and the minister walked thoughtfully away.
"You'd better go too," said the bridegroom; for Miss Higgins had boldly climbed over the wall by this time and was twisting her curls over a slate-pencil with a killing air.
*"I wasn't arsed!"* said the poor little widow; but she, too, walked mournfully away._

_Trotty's Wedding Tour, and Story-book
_
Slightly different I know, but with the similar meaning of "I wasn't bothered".


----------



## Loob

Isn't that "I wasn't asked" in the sense "Nobody asked me", Trochfa?


----------



## Trochfa

No, I don't think so Loob. The man has suddenly become available for marriage, she jumps over the wall and starts playing all coy, and he says "you may as well go".  i.e. "I'm not interested in marrying you" to which she then replies "I wasn't arsed [anyway]!" (I wasn't bothered anyway!) which is funny because she obviously was enough to hang around and see the man become divorced and then climb over the wall and start making doe eyes. She knows she wasn't asked because, well, nobody asked her.

It's one hell of a weird typo to let through otherwise in 1873.


----------



## Loob

I thought the "poor little widow" was Nita, the one who's just been 'divorced'....

Edit But I'll leave it there!


----------



## Trochfa

Loob said:


> I thought the "poor little widow" was Nita, the one who's just been 'divorced'....



It could be actually, because Miss Higgins is a "Miss" and therefore presumably can't be a widow, unless she'd re-adopted the Miss afterwards.

I still think it's arsed*, but of course with "arsed" and "asked" being used for the same thing makes it very difficult to distinguish. 

[* I've probably just got a dirty mind! ]


----------



## Trochfa

James Brandon said:


> If I would not do anything (as opposed to something), regardless of who asked me to do it (you, or you, or you), then I truly *can't* be asked.' Apparently in the 1990s people changed it to *arsed* and it just kind of stuck. My best friend says asked, I say *arsed*.10 Feb 2009



I think I've found the answer as to how/why people have mistakenly thought that its use started in the 1990s. According to The New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English:

Arsed: adjective: bothered, worried  UK
*Popularised* since the mid-1990s by television situation comedy _*The Royle Family*. 
The New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English_

The series was hugely popular in the UK in the late 1990s, which is why it moved from BBC2 to BBC1. Usage of the phrase would have suddenly and dramatically increased and become widespread throughout the country around this time, meaning those who hadn't known the term before and who starting hearing people using it might have just mistakenly assumed that it had _appeared_ or _developed _suddenly somehow in the 1990s.

A typical, relevant, dialogue would go something like this:
*Jim Royle* (to son-in-law Dave):_ I thought you were going to watch the footie down the pub tonight?_
*Dave:*_ I was, but then I thought I might as well watch it here. I can't be arsed moving._
*Denise* (Dave' wife):_ You can't be arsed doing anything these days!_
*Jim:*_ Excuse me! There's too much arse in this house! 





_
The Royle Family - Wikipedia


----------



## James Brandon

For the record, the extract below was not something I said but something I found on line, on the web site called The Student Room:-

_If I would not do anything (as opposed to something), regardless of who asked me to do it (you, or you, or you), then I truly *can't* be asked.' Apparently in the 1990s people changed it to *arsed* and it just kind of stuck. My best friend says asked, I say *arsed*.10 Feb 2009_

Having said all this, your explanation (#79) could be relevant. It sounds like we have 2 main dates/ years: 1968, when the phrase (with 'arsed') would have been invented, and the 1990s, when people started hearing it a lot and some assumed it was a corruption of 'can't be asked'. All of this remains speculative, though, it seems to me.

PS And a fine family it was too, much emulated then and since.


----------



## Truffula

What I think, based on the evidence gathered so far, is that "arsed" meaning "bothered" was around well before the 1960s but in a small regional dialect somewhere in Britain.  Someone in the music business used that dialect and started to popularize it among musicians in the 1960s-1970s, and a few (including the Beatles) picked it up, and maybe a few Americans (at least one) heard it too and thought it was "asked" because "arse" is not an interpretation natural in American English, but even though this small group of musicians used it occasionally, it didn't grow in popularity until some script writer from that same regional dialect thought it'd be fun to use it on that Royle Family TV show.  That was what got it being used over a wider area.  Americans (not just USA, but also Caribbean English speakers) continued to hear it as "asked" and use it that way, spreading that version around too.  

That seems likeliest given the scarcity of citations from before the 1990s even though a few reliable ones exist as mentioned in this thread.


----------



## James Brandon

Interesting recap of what has been said and established so far. On the other hand, if the expression (with 'arsed') pre-dated the 1960s and had a regional English origin, which is entirely possible and even likely, surely, there would be traces of that? I have not re-read the entire Thread but I do not remember that the actual expression has been quoted in any text pre-1960s. (Even if it was dialect, i.e. spoken English, it is likely it would somehow have appeared in print, in a novel or short story, or in a press article, or in a glossary/ dictionary...)


----------



## heypresto

I was going to compare this debate with this notorious 18-page long thread, but I couldn't be arsed.


----------



## PaulQ

James Brandon said:


> On the other hand, if the expression (with 'arsed') pre-dated the 1960s


You seem to be saying that "arsed" should have appeared in print earlier than it apparently did - I cannot see the logic behind this, as this could be true of any word that is first introduced in speech, e.g. the OED informs that the word "rule" first appears in print in 1225 - it may well have been around in speech before then - are we to assume that somewhere there is a document dated earlier? And if we find that document, should we look for a yet earlier one? Do we have any reason to believe that even earlier documents might exist?

The end result of that line of thought is that mankind evolved with Modern English upon his lips and a pen poised in his hand.


----------



## Trochfa

I agree with much of what you've written Truffula, although I believe it was probably part of the Lancashire/Yorkshire (and surrounding counties/areas) dialects before the 1960s. My gut reaction is that Paul McCartney used it without picking it up anywhere else other than in his home city of Liverpool. I think that is also why it seemed so natural in _The Royle Family_ which was set in Manchester.

The answer as to why there are no early examples in print is easy. It was and still is by considered by many to be extremely crude. People generally didn't say "arse" or "fuck" unless they were with their "mates" in an extremely informal situation and so that isn't the speech they would use when talking to reporters. However, the 1960s was an era where many people's attitudes "relaxed" somewhat and this led to things like this being said in front of reporters etc and being seen in print for the first time.

If you look at Google Ngrams you will see that there are some very early 1800s examples in print of "fuck", which then disappears before "taking off" again in the 1960s. However, when you look at the early examples you will see they are all misinterpretations of words such as "such" and "suck".  

I think Hunter Davies is the reason that the first known example in print occurs in 1968 because he says that quotes in the book about the Beatles were:


Trochfa said:


> fresh from their mouths, unchanged, unvarnished,



That was probably quite a big change to previous eras where editors would have "tidied" things up by pruning out or replacing any rude words.


----------



## James Brandon

Paul Q, what I said is not that the expression _should _appear before it is known (for sure) to have done so (1960s). What I said is that, _if _the origin of the phrase is local dialect and pre-dates the 1960s -- perhaps by many years or many decades -- then, it is odd there would be no _earlier_ trace in _print_ than that interview in 1968. 

Trochfa (#85) has given an explanation but I am not 100% convinced by that, although it is plausible. He has addressed the issue I was raising, as opposed to attempting to discredit the fact I was raising it, which, I believe, is more interesting and more constructive.

The nGram of the word 'arse' shows, unsurprisingly, that its use took off in or around 1940 and is increasing all the time. But it does appear way before 1940, also in the early part of the 19th century: people would not have printed it as liberally as they do today, but it does not mean it would appear nowhere. And the word 'arse' is as rude, presumably, as the expression, 'to be arsed to do something'.

I think we are working towards the 18 pp. Please note: I am not the one who revived this Thread.


----------



## Trochfa

As my final input, I wanted to check that the first appearance was definitely in 1968 as the links online are to later editions.

I've just received a cheap/battered first edition of _The Beatles, The Authorised Biography_ from 1968 and the "I can't be arsed" quote is definitely in there on page 158.


----------



## heypresto

Wow, Trochfa, that's going well above and beyond the call of duty. I'm deeply impressed.


----------



## James Brandon

Good forensic work! So, 1968 it is, until further notice. The hypothesis regarding a local/ regional origin, probably centred on the north of England, sounds coherent. If there are contributors to this Forum from that part of the UK, they might be able to confirm the use of the expression in the 1960s or even a bit earlier, in spoken English, if they are a bit older.


----------



## Simonb18

James Brandon said:


> Good forensic work! So, 1968 it is, until further notice. The hypothesis regarding a local/ regional origin, probably centred on the north of England, sounds coherent. If there are contributors to this Forum from that part of the UK, they might be able to confirm the use of the expression in the 1960s or even a bit earlier, in spoken English, if they are a bit older.




I am from the north and we used “can’t be arsed” frequently in the 70s and I am sure adults used it too, indicating it could have been used earlier, in the 60s where I lived. In the last year, I’ve heard two people in their early 20s from London say “I can’t be asked”. It may be linguistic, but it could also be the rise of the millennial. Back in the 70s, we couldn’t be arsed (ie get off our backsides to do something) whereas today’s generation can’t be told (asked) to do something.  Also, sorry this thread from a while ago may suddenly darken your door again!


----------



## James Brandon

If I recall what was said, the dominant view was that the correct phrase is indeed 'can't be arsed' and 'can't be asked' was a misinterpretation of it, perhaps motivated by a desire not to offend (i.e. to use decaff language). No one mentioned a generational angle, but it is conceivable that it would play a part.

PS Good Threads never die and come back to life at irregular intervals.


----------



## lizzylou2

Simonb18 said:


> I am from the north and we used “can’t be arsed” frequently in the 70s and I am sure adults used it too, indicating it could have been used earlier, in the 60s where I lived. In the last year, I’ve heard two people in their early 20s from London say “I can’t be asked”. It may be linguistic, but it could also be the rise of the millennial. Back in the 70s, we couldn’t be arsed (ie get off our backsides to do something) whereas today’s generation can’t be told (asked) to do something.  Also, sorry this thread from a while ago may suddenly darken your door again!


----------



## lizzylou2

I had a boyfriend in the early 90s who came from Liverpool and he used to say I can't be arsed. My current partner is from Gravesend and he says I can't be asked. I tell him he's wrong (he also talks about arctics, meaning articulated lorries) but to no avail. So I think it's a regional thing.


----------



## James Brandon

There could be a regional angle in terms of usage, but we would need more examples. In terms of your partner, does he use 'can't be asked' because that is what they say in Gravesend, or because he has misinterpreted the original phrase (which has been the consensus view in this Thread), regardless of where he is from?


----------



## lizzylou2

He won't admit it but I think he's just got it wrong! I will investigate other Gravesend based family members! But it could be that it is clearer to a northerner.


----------



## heypresto

Does he also say 'e*c*scape'?

I had a very dear friend once who used to say this. It drove me bonkers.


----------



## James Brandon

Can those Gravesend-based family members 'be arsed' to follow up on this (or 'asked', for that matter)?


----------



## london calling

Gravesend is not that far from whence I hail (south London) and we say 'arsed'. I think he just gets it wrong too.


----------



## sound shift

James Brandon said:


> perhaps motivated by a desire not to offend (i.e. to use decaff language).


----------



## Loob

I'm intrigued to know whether those to prefer "asked" accept the construction  "can't be * doing x".
I'd have thought it would seem wrong to them.

And yet it exists....


----------



## Bukoz

Cwej said:


> In my view this is very particular to people from certain cultural backgrounds in the UK. I teach in an inner London school and kids from Caribbean backgrounds tend to pronounce asked similar to this: ‘arksed’ rather than ‘arsked’ with the k and s sounds reversed.
> 
> Similarly it is students from Caribbean backgrounds that tend to say ‘I can’t be asked’ rather than ‘I can’t be arsed’, the error coming from mishearing the correct word, because when you swap the k and s sounds ‘asked’ and ‘arsed’ sound almost indistinguishable.


 I recall recall the similarity of sound of the words from the 60s and believe that "can't be asked" was a non slang but slightly idiomatic form antonym for "biddable" or "helpful". One might say of a helpful person that they were very "biddable" the opposite would be to say, "oh they can't (or more often _won't_) be asked"  meaning they won't even listen to your request for information or help. The target of the phrase being a negative sort of person deserved a coarser word and as 'arse' itself became a more commonly used word in England (an old English/Saxon? word meaning backside and made popular in American and re exported to UK) together with the phonetic confusion; "can't be 'arsed'" became common slang. The transition of "arsed" to meaning "bothered" (could or could not be bothered) was completed by the 1980's (Cassell's dictionary of slang) and the rise of the yuppie culture in UK, the slang phrase became common personal description and the old idiom " can't/won't be 'asked'" faded away. I might find my conjecture hard to prove but it is my recollection and chimes with Cwej's evidence.


----------



## James Brandon

Bukoz: This is interesting and it is the exact opposite of what has been said so far, overall. Most contributors have argued that the original and correct (linguistically, in terms of accuracy and origin) phrase is 'can't be arsed' and that 'can't be asked' is, as it were, a milder form of it used by people who, either, know that the original phrase is 'arsed' and don't want to use it (they think it might shock, etc.), or by people who haven't realised the original phrase is with 'arsed' and have misunderstood and assumed it is with 'asked'. 

You seem to be arguing the opposite, that is to say that 'he can't be asked' or 'he won't be asked' was an established phrase, and it was corrupted into 'can't be arsed', as the language got coarser over the 1970s/ 1980s, if I understand your point correctly. 

As for the word 'arse' being a re-export from America (via 'ass', presumably), I am not sure that is the case, if we assume that 'arse' is one of those old Anglo-Saxon words that must have been floating around, so to speak, for a very, very long time.


----------



## suzi br

Why oh why oh why! 
Isn’t it time this tired old thread was retired?


----------



## James Brandon

It is a bit like vintage wine: gets better as it gets older.


----------



## suzi br

James Brandon said:


> It is a bit like vintage wine: gets better as it gets older.





[Side comment deleted.  DonnyB - moderator]  I agree with your analysis, by the way, in case anyone has forgotten what I said two years ago.


----------



## ewie

James Brandon said:


> it was corrupted into 'can't be arsed', as the language got coarser over the 1970s/ 1980s


Even _I_ remember from one of this thread's previous frankensteinings that the OED's earliest printed attestation is from (erm) one of the Beatles in the 1960s ... and, as we all know, earliest printed attestations ~ particularly in the case of slang ~ are always years if not decades 'late'.


----------



## heypresto

If you think _this_ thread is long, you've got another think coming.


----------



## James Brandon

We are on our way. It is a journey. Unless you can't be 'arsed' (or is it 'asked'?), of course.


----------



## suzi br

heypresto said:


> If you think _this_ thread is long, you've got another think coming.



Oh yes. I am familiar with that gem.
I blame the letter K: insinuating itself where it’s not needed or wanted. It has form for silent sneaking about.


----------



## Bukoz

James Brandon said:


> Bukoz: This is interesting and it is the exact opposite of what has been said so far, overall. Most contributors have argued that the original and correct (linguistically, in terms of accuracy and origin) phrase is 'can't be arsed' and that 'can't be asked' is, as it were, a milder form of it used by people who, either, know that the original phrase is 'arsed' and don't want to use it (they think it might shock, etc.), or by people who haven't realised the original phrase is with 'arsed' and have misunderstood and assumed it is with 'asked'.
> 
> You seem to be arguing the opposite, that is to say that 'he can't be asked' or 'he won't be asked' was an established phrase, and it was corrupted into 'can't be arsed', as the language got coarser over the 1970s/ 1980s, if I understand your point correctly.
> 
> As for the word 'arse' being a re-export from America (via 'ass', presumably), I am not sure that is the case, if we assume that 'arse' is one of those old Anglo-Saxon words that must have been floating around, so to speak, for a very, very long time.


My view was based on recalling the he/she won't/can't be asked from my youth - it was an idiom and definitely not slang. People were more genteel in the 60s and of course they may have been using asked as a genteelism for arsed.
Arse originally meant buttock - ordinary usage describing and anatomical body part of say an animal (horse, cattle,...). It was also used to describe the hindmost in the sense of hanging back ~lazy and was and still is used to lustilly refer to a woman. I had never heard of "arse" meaning "be bothered" until I came across the slang phrase "...couldn't be arsed" meaning "... is unmotivated, or bothered - couldn't care less". This thread suggest that meaning was there in the 60s thought Cassells Dictionary of Slang suggested the meaning and phrase from the 80s - perhaps it became more popular in that decade. I had heard of it meaning 'a stupid person' or 'backside' as in the American "ass". Ass and arse are interchangeable in respect of backside due to the American usage. I have never come across "couldn't be assed".
I am simply curious about the phrase and have the speculation I described. I claim no special knowledge - perhaps the asked genteelism was my first encounter.


----------



## James Brandon

Bukoz: I think that is fair enough. When I posted the Thread, I was not sure myself of the phrase's origin, one way or the other. Your hypothesis and recollection would be in the minority, however (and one could argue that it only proves so much). The majority view, if one takes the various contributions, is that the original phrase is indeed 'can't be arsed'. 

If you have the exact quote from the Cassells Dictionary of Slang, this would be interesting: you are saying that they state clearly that 'can't be arsed' would be a 1980s phrase. It should be pointed out that several contributors disagree, either because they say it was used before (in their own recollection), or because they've seen it quoted in relation to earlier texts (from the 1960s, precisely). There is also the argument that, by the time a phrase or word pops up in print, it is likely to have been around (in the spoken language) for quite a long while, possibly a couple of decades...


----------



## ewie

James Brandon said:


> There is also the argument that, by the time a phrase or word pops up in print, it is likely to have been around (in the spoken language) for quite a long while, possibly a couple of decades...


Why I do believe I said precisely that in post #104.


----------



## James Brandon

I know. That's why I included it in my summary. In fairness, Ewie, it has been said before -- I mean, maybe not in this Thread, but as a general truth in relation to language.


----------



## Bukoz

James Brandon said:


> Bukoz: I think that is fair enough. When I posted the Thread, I was not sure myself of the phrase's origin, one way or the other. Your hypothesis and recollection would be in the minority, however (and one could argue that it only proves so much). The majority view, if one takes the various contributions, is that the original phrase is indeed 'can't be arsed'.
> 
> If you have the exact quote from the Cassells Dictionary of Slang, this would be interesting: you are saying that they state clearly that 'can't be arsed' would be a 1980s phrase. It should be pointed out that several contributors disagree, either because they say it was used before (in their own recollection), or because they've seen it quoted in relation to earlier texts (from the 1960s, precisely). There is also the argument that, by the time a phrase or word pops up in print, it is likely to have been around (in the spoken language) for quite a long while, possibly a couple of decades...


In the 1998 edition of The Cassell Dictionary of Slang, "arsed/assed _adj_. [1980s+] bothered concerned e.g. _I can't e arsed to do it_ [ARSE n. 5 ]" and "arse/ass, the n.5  [1960s+] (orig. US) a bad temper (cf RED ARSE) [fig use of ARSE n.1]"
The contributor "Cwej" wrote about some phonetic transpositions of s and k sounds. I lived in London during my earlier years and certain groups of people dropped "t"s - what I think is a glottal stop but there were commonly other deviations from so-called proper English pronunciation to make articulation easier e.g., _when 'e arst me wha' I wan'ed I didn' 'ave a clue_ (excuse my poor example) but "asked" frequently would sound as "arst". To me the sound "arst" is similar to "arsed". 
Was the context of the 1960s example of written "can't be arsed" a written example of vernacular speech reporting and was the meaning of the word arsed unambiguously = bothered/concerned? Or, could the words "can't be arsed" have meant "being decidedly/actively unhelpful" (or can't be asked)?


----------



## Loob

OED (Third Edition), updated to September 2018:
*arse, v.*
*3. transitive (in passive). To be willing to make the required effort; to be bothered. Usually in negative constructions, such as can't be arsed (to do something).*
1968   H. Davies _Beatles_ xix. 158   If they can't be arsed waiting for me, I can't be arsed going after them.
1988   G. Patterson _Burning your Own_ vii. 88   Don't forget who it was who organized the building of all this when you were too sulky to be arsed doing anything.
1995   _Empire_ Nov. 29/1   If you can't be arsed to work it out, the process is explained in loving detail on page 35.
2014   G. Wiles _Where Birds Hide at Night_ 2   Sod off world, I can't be arsed with you today.


----------



## James Brandon

The Cassell quote Vs the OED one clearly presents us with 2 completely different interpretations. Your take on the phonetics, Bukoz, does have merit, I would say. On the other hand, if Cassell missed out on earlier uses of the phrase with 'arsed' in British English (cf. 1968 quote, over 10 years before the start of the 1980s), and available in print, the Cassell take on the phrase falls apart, to a large extent, I would have thought. Maybe they mean 1980s as in, that is when, in their view, the phrase became commonly used.

Ultimately, I have a feeling we won't know whether the original phrase was one (arsed/ asked) or the other, and which one stemmed from the other. It could even be the case that both phrases arose more or less simultaneously. 

What is for sure, and as stated before, is that a majority of contributors feel that the version of the phrase with 'arse' is the accurate one.


----------



## Lorretta

James Brandon said:


> A friend of mine raised this issue. This one puzzled me and I double-checked on line and there are differing opinions. One expression would be a variation on the other, but there is no consensus as to which one came first, it seems.
> 
> Some people say 'can't be asked' is a decaf version of 'can't be arsed', but other people say that the latter was made up whereas the former was the original one.
> 
> 'Can't be arsed' is BE.
> 
> Insight welcome. Thanks
> 
> PS I have checked the dictionary but the expression does not seem to be included.
> ----------
> 
> _If I would not do anything (as opposed to something), regardless of who asked me to do it (you, or you, or you), then I truly *can't* be asked.' Apparently in the 1990s people changed it to *arsed* and it just kind of stuck. My best friend says asked, I say *arsed*.10 Feb 2009_
> 
> *Can't be arsed vs. Can't be asked - The Student Room*
> www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=811879
> 
> _https://www.google.co.uk/#q=he+can%27t+be+arsed_


Hi James, I was born in the early 1950s and all my brothers are and were older than me. My eldest being born in 1933. The original saying is ‘Can’t be asked’. That’s what my Grandad said and my Dad born before WW1 and my older brothers. The question came up while my brother was alive about a decade ago. He explained it to me. Now you probably won’t find any proof of it on the internet that just repeats  the same inaccuracies but it came from a war time song. A very old war time song that my grandad  sang. Before WW1. It means and used to include ‘I can’t be asked by God, I can’t be asked by my King’ so I wont be asked by anyone and certainly not asked by you meaning the Sarge probably. People spoke differently a century ago so though it might not make sense now it makes more sense to me than can’t be arsed that younger people seem to use now. Nothing to do with being changed because arsed was too rude for people to say. There was no such word as arsed. It was arse. Soldiers had no problem singing songs with stronger words than that. Usually smart arse or silly arse. Anyway I hope that helps. You have to remember most people old enough to remember it’s origin are either dead or don’t use the internet.


----------



## James Brandon

Thank you and this is interesting. I have not re-read the entire Thread going back 6 years but, if I remember correctly, the idea that the 'correct' expression would be 'can't be asked' was generally dismissed by contributors, who said it was definitely 'can't be arsed', and 'can't be asked' would have been a watered-down version re-invented after the event by sensitive souls, as it were.

According to your family recollections, it would indeed by 'can't be asked', which would have been rendered 'can't be arsed' out of a desire to, presumably, strengthen the statement, spice it up and shock.

It is interesting how, going back 2 generations, you quickly cover 100 years, i.e. you go back to WWI, which is what family memories are about. It is striking that there would have actually been a discussion within your family about this very topic, but I suppose that this can happen and, when it does, it is the kind of thing you would remember.

What would be interesting would be to find a trace of the war-time song you quote. I have tried and nothing comes up in Google at all. Not a single reference. If you change the spelling from 'asked' to 'arsed', nothing comes up either. And I somehow doubt a WWI song would have combined a rude word ('arsed') with the mention of God in the same breath.

So, the jury is out on this one, but it is an interesting recollection.


----------



## suzi br

Argh. 
But nice to see dear Donny’s moderating work memorialised in the thread.


----------



## James Brandon

I take it Donny is not (and is no longer) in a position to give us an answer or provide a comment.


----------



## Edinburgher

You could say that.  They don't have internet in heaven.
See this thread: DonnyB


----------



## James Brandon

Thank you and it is nice to see that he was well-liked, as all the comments show. And, of course, it is sad that he passed away back in January.

I am not sure I will get so many positive _post-mortem_ tributes from fellow contributors when my time comes. However, I want to reassure everyone: for the time being, I am _not_ dead_ yet_ (whether that's deemed a blessing or not on this Forum). It is me writing this, not an avatar or an AI robot.

PS The Moderator on duty today should feel free to delete this post, as it is clearly and blatantly off-topic. I plead guilty as charged and hope it won't be deemed a cardinal sin, on _this_ occasion. 😆


----------



## Roxxxannne

James Brandon said:


> Thank you and it is nice to see that he was well-liked, as all the comments show. And, of course, it is sad that he passed away back in January.
> 
> I am not sure I will get so many positive _post-mortem_ tributes from fellow contributors when my time comes. However, I want to reassure everyone: for the time being, I am _not_ dead_ yet_ (whether that's deemed a blessing or not on this Forum). It is me writing this, not an avatar or an AI robot.
> 
> PS The Moderator on duty today should feel free to delete this post, as it is clearly and blatantly off-topic. I plead guilty as charged and hope it won't be deemed a cardinal sin, on _this_ occasion. 😆


I expect that the moderator can't be arsed to delete it.


----------



## Edinburgher

Not even if asked nicely?


----------



## James Brandon

And, to respond to Post #123, I wouldn't blame them.  

Amen.


----------



## sound shift

For a lot of people in England, "asked" and "arsed" use different vowels, so it's unlikely that those people at least decided to use the former as a "clean" version of the latter.


----------



## James Brandon

Sanitizing language often involves sound shifts (to echo the contributor's _nom de plume_). There are many examples: _Gawd_ (sounding like_ door_) Vs. _God_ (sounding like _pod_). Not the same sound at all. And yet, unless I am wrong, the 1st is a 'weak' form of the 2nd one, to avoid using the actual word. So, I am not sure the argument stands. 

Then again, this does not really prove anything, specifically, in relation to the subject of this Thread. I thought Post #117 more pertinent.


----------



## sound shift

James Brandon said:


> Then again, this does not really prove anything, specifically, in relation to the subject of this Thread.


 I didn't presume to _prove_ anything, but I believe my post is no more off-topic than many of the contributions to this thread.


----------



## James Brandon

To clarify, when I said "this does not really prove anything", I actually meant that my _general _statement on sound shifts and phonetics did not prove anything in relation to, _specifically_, the topic of the thread: in other words, it is not enough to invalidate or prove anything. I was not referring to _your_ statement, but to _my_ comment on it, if that makes sense.

And I was not implying that any of that was off-topic: clearly, it is relevant to the topic.

And all of this goes to show how easy it is to be misunderstood when one communicates (or tries to) online. 

I'll add that, yes, I can be _arsed _to clarify. It is amazing how much interest this expression attracts, when you think about it. It is an expression one would use when one cannot be bothered (to respond), and yet, many people are more than willing to bother to respond to any interpretation of the expression that they view as wrong or silly. A strange phenomenon. 😝


----------



## bingaling

JulianStuart said:


> Can't be arsed - assed? (BrE vs. [pseudo-]AmE)
> Can't be arsed/bothered + infinitive/gerund
> 
> If you think you will achieve clarity on the origin(al spelling) of this expression, you have another think coming


That's funny!


----------



## James Brandon

Maybe - I stress, maybe - *both* exist, and they co-exist happily. Both X 2, that is, which would be 4 phrases.  🤣


----------

