# what astrological sign are you under



## Sun14

Hello, my friends,

I was wondering whether I could ask this question for the period of time someone is born in regarding the astrological sign:

"what astrological sign are you under."


----------



## Silver

What's your (sun) sign?


----------



## manfy

I usually say "What's your Zodiac (sign)?" or "What's your star sign?". Most people seem to understand the latter, but not everybody understands 'zodiac'. (in Asian English!!)


----------



## Sun14

Thank you very much, Silver and manfy.


----------



## Glenfarclas

None of the answers given above is right in standard English, unfortunately. I think most of them wouldn't make sense at all.  Stick with "What's your sign?", "What's your sign of the zodiac?", or "What's your astrological sign?".


----------



## Dale Texas

Glenfarclas said:


> None of the answers given above is right in standard English, unfortunately. I think most of them wouldn't make sense at all.  Stick with "What's your sign?", "What's your sign of the zodiac?", or "What's your astrological sign?".



I agree.


----------



## Silver

I just don't understand why mine is wrong.


----------



## Glenfarclas

Because we don't call them "sun signs," Silver.


----------



## Andygc

Silverobama said:


> I just don't understand why mine is wrong.


They aren't sun signs, they're star signs. "What's your star sign?" would be perfectly acceptable in BE, but don't ask me as I'm liable to PML.*

*Approximately equivalent to ROFL = "roll on floor laughing", but British, cruder and damper.


----------



## velisarius

Yes Andy, and they can be persistent with this quizzing.

Most people just say: _What's your sign?_
If I feign ignorance, they say:_ You know... your birth sign. Duh!_ (or one of Glen's suggestions).
Me:_ I've no idea._
Persistent person (gleefully):_ OK just tell me when you were born._
Me:_ I've forgotten._


----------



## Silver

According to our dictionary, "sun sign" means "sign of the zodiac", also, I used () to mean that this is optional.

Anyway, thanks a lot.


----------



## Andygc

Silverobama said:


> According to our dictionary, "sun sign" means "sign of the zodiac"


Yes, very strange - both Random House and Collins. I've never seen that usage. I know that believers talk of the sun being in their sign, but for somebody to say "my sun sign is Saggitarius" would seem bizarre to me. The OED does not give this meaning and its only entry containing the phrase is a citation illustrating the use of "sun" attributively "With reference to the worship of the sun, etc."


> 1893 S. O. Addy _Hall of Waltheof_ 93  The sign of the cross was itself a sun-sign amongst the heathen Northmen.





Silverobama said:


> also, I used () to mean that this is optional.


Yes, I think we understood that.


----------



## manfy

Silverobama said:


> According to our dictionary, "sun sign" means "sign of the zodiac", also, I used () to mean that this is optional.
> 
> Anyway, thanks a lot.


 
Well, that may be a result of the 60's (hippie years) and the 70's (emergence of 'transcendental lifestyles').
I've never heard sun sign before in Europe but I heard it several times in China.

Anyways, Ngram viewer says you're right since 'sun sign' seems to have overtaken 'sign of zodiac'. (although Google is not very trustworthy when it comes to newer literature because of copyright issues, I guess. So, take the result with a pinch of salt!)


----------



## Sun14

manfy said:


> Well, that may be a result of the 60's (hippie years) and the 70's (emergence of 'transcendental lifestyles').
> I've never heard sun sign before in Europe but I heard it several times in China.
> 
> Anyways, Ngram viewer says you're right since 'sun sign' seems to have overtaken 'sign of zodiac'. (although Google is not very trustworthy when it comes to newer literature because of copyright issues, I guess. So, take the result with a pinch of salt!)



Got it. Thank you very much.


----------



## Dale Texas

I'll have to accept, then, that "star sign" is acceptable in BE, and don't question the logic of it, but I've never heard it before.


----------



## Silver

I am really into astrology. And one of my pickup lines is "What's your sign". I once said "What's your zodiac sign", no, not me, but my teacher from Detroit!

And according to Susan Miller, a well-known astrologer, sun sign makes sense. Please take a look at her website here.

I've never heard of "star sign" before. And I guess that term is old-fashioned. 

Since there are many termonologies about horoscope. We'd better stick with "What's your sign"?

But I really don't think "What's your sun sign" is wrong.


----------



## Sun14

Dale Texas said:


> I'll have to accept, then, that "star sign" is acceptable in BE, and don't question the logic of it, but I've never heard it before.



Got it. Thank you very much.


----------



## AutumnOwl

Silverobama said:


> What's your (sun) sign?





Andygc said:


> They aren't sun signs, they're star signs. "What's your star sign?"


The star/sun sign is the zodiac sign where the Sun was placed when a person was born. When doing a horoscope the Sun sign is only one of twelve (or more) positions in the zodiac. Most people are only familiar with their Sun sign, and don't know the other positions of the Moon, the planets, the ascendant and MC.


----------



## Parla

> What's your (sun) sign?


This is perfectly correct in AE. Both "What's your sign?" and "What's your sun sign?" are used in the US. (I've never heard "What's your 'star' sign?") In astrology, the sign under which one was born is in fact referred to as one's _sun sign_, indicating the position of the sun in a particular constellation at the time of one's birth.


----------



## bennymix

Sure we do.   There are best sellers with such titles.

http://www.amazon.com/Linda-Goodmans-Sun-Signs-Goodman/dp/0553278827
*Sun Signs* by Linda Goodman.

Also  "What sign are you born under?"




Glenfarclas said:


> Because we don't call them "sun signs," Silver.


----------



## bennymix

Famous British Astrologers' "_Sun Signs, Moon Signs_" book.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sun-Sign-Mo...UTF8&qid=1448559261&sr=8-5&keywords=sun+signs

Andy, you're out of the loop!    (Note:  Sagittarius)

Yes, very strange - both Random House and Collins. I've never seen that usage. I know that believers talk of the sun being in their sign, but for somebody to say "my sun sign is Saggitarius" would seem bizarre to me. The OED does not give this meaning and its only entry containing the phrase is a citation illustrating the use of "sun" attributively "With reference to the worship of the sun, etc."


----------



## Parla

Silver's "What's your (sun) sign?" is perfectly correct in AE and is the common question. They _are_ called "sun signs" in the US. (I've never heard "What's your star sign?") In astrology, the sun sign indicates the presumed position of the sun within a particular constellation at the time of one's birth. _Sun Signs_, by Linda Goodman,* was a major bestseller in the late 1960s-early 1970s and is selling well to this day.**

*A _nom de plume_ of Mary Alice Kemery (1925-1995).
**See it, and similarly titled books, advertised here.


----------



## bennymix

Right, but with the amendment that 'signs' are not constellations (though they bear the same names).
The sign of Aries is more or less the time the Sun is in Pisces Constellation.



Parla said:


> Silver's "What's your (sun) sign?" is perfectly correct in AE and is the common question. They _are_ called "sun signs" in the US. (I've never heard "What's your star sign?") In astrology, the sun sign indicates the presumed position of the sun within a particular constellation at the time of one's birth. _Sun Signs_, by Linda Goodman,* was a major bestseller in the late 1960s-early 1970s and is selling well to this day.**
> 
> *A nom de plume of Mary Alice Kemery (1925-1995).
> **See it, and similarly titled books, advertised here.


----------



## Cagey

I agree with Parla.

When this was more popular, people would ask _'What's your sign?'_ with the understanding that the reference was to the sun sign, the sign most people knew.  People also had moon signs, and people who were serious about astrology would want to know both. That is, there would be some point in specifying 'sun sign' in that context.

When the signs were named, they coincided with the times the sun was in the particular constellation.  They no longer do, but the names have persisted.  Now they essentially indicate specific times of the year.


----------



## PaulQ

We Sagittarians don't believe in "star signs."


----------



## Andygc

bennymix said:


> Andy, you're out of the loop!  (Note: Sagittarius)


I was never in it. Sorry about the typo. Astrology is, as far as I'm concerned, meaningless twaddle - about as useful as homeopathy and less useful than a chocolate teapot. However; I've still never previously heard of a sun sign. I've heard "it's all in the stars",  never "it's all in the sun".


----------



## Hermione Golightly

There are differing opinions about astrology in the UK, very differing. Many people have nothing but complete scorn for this and any other belief systems and I am one of them, along I should think, with everybody else *I *know. So I certainly can't talk with any specialist knowledge.
I have from time to time, been asked 'What sign were you born under?' and 'What's your sign of the zodiac?' or even, in joyful tones almost _accused_: 'I bet you're (Taurus) aren't you!'( I'm not) and then been faced with one of those agonising only-the- English dilemmas: do I have to be 'nice' and agree, or is it OK to say ... a compromise of the deletable expletives I feel like saying.

I would welcome such a pick-up line from a fellow Brit because I'd know at once that I had nothing at all in common with the young man. We would both be saved a lot of time.
_My comments reflect cultural differences, that's all. _I would also not have been 'seduced' by an invitation to Sunday morning church, as a first date.
I'm fairly sure that (devout) Christianity must exclude belief in astrology.

I expect that if I was asked about my 'sun sign' by an Asian I would realise that it had something to do with astrology and I would most definitely respect that because I understand that it is important in many cultures.

Being asked about my 'sign', by a European, is a very clear 'sign' to me.


----------



## Parla

> Astrology is, as far as I'm concerned, meaningless twaddle . . .


Of course it is, Andy. But it makes for interesting chitchat and, back in the '70s, it was evidently a workable pickup line. Trust me. I'm a Leo. Leos are always right; everybody knows that.


----------



## Andygc

Well, I went looking for "sun signs" and, yes, I must have been living a sheltered (or detached) life - they're all over the place. I found this 





> The xxxx-born are keenly interested in philosophy and religion, and they find that these disciplines aid their internal quest.


I better not tell my wife, she'd die laughing, probably before she could splutter out "your _*what*_ quest?"


----------



## Dale Texas

Twaddle to me, also yes, but I was a voracious reader and wanted to know all about something that was all the rage, plus I have great respect for the ancients all over the world who saw patterns and performed amazing calculations of all kinds. 

I would find "What's your sun sign?" to be clumsy-redundant, since "sun" as the referent would be understood, which is why some here in their posts have been setting off_ sun _in parenthesis. 

Just "What's your sign?" suffices, and is the idiomatic question, as opposed to book/article titles and discussions.

(Yes, I'm a Leo, but that doesn't come from the stars.  That comes from me lazing around in the sun and letting the females of my pride do the hunting for me. )


----------



## Silver

It's interesting to talk about signs with a galaxy of linguists.

Every year, Chinese believers spend countless money in horoscope. One of my previous students (She's a college student) told me she once ask an astrologer to predict her future with her birth date. (1500 yuan) And the only result she got from that astrologer was "Your star was in asendant".

But here, I'd like to be more specific about the so-called sun sign and moon sign.

Sun sign=sign (Your birth date. I was born in 1987.1.2 and my sign is Capricorn. That explains why I always need a sentence)
Moon sign (This is more complicated. Usually people do horoscope will use a form to check what you moon sign is. Very complicated. But basically, the "moon" stands for "soft, woman" while the "sun" stands for "man. Also moon sign is closed related to equinox.)

Trust me.


----------



## Wordsmyth

manfy said:


> Anyways, Ngram viewer says you're right since 'sun sign' seems to have overtaken 'sign of zodiac'.


That's true for the sample of _all_ English publications, but if you run the ngram for 'British English' you see a completely different picture: 'sign of the zodiac' is well in the lead, ahead of 'star sign' and 'zodiac sign', with 'sun sign' well below and apparently losing ground.

Interestingly, the ngram for 'American English' is very similar to the 'all English' results (which might suggest that astrology is a bigger thing in the US than in the UK ... or not) — and "sun sign" was almost nowhere in the US chart until the late 60s and early 70s, when it really took off. Combining that with Parla's comment ... 





Parla said:


> _Sun Signs_, by Linda Goodman,* was a major bestseller in the late 1960s-early 1970s and is selling well to this day.


 ... one might be tempted to think that that one book had a huge influence on the popularity of the term "sun sign"!

Ws


----------



## Parla

In the US, they were called "sun signs" before the book came along. If they hadn't been, people would have supposed from the title that the work was a treatise on astronomy and it would have died an early death rather than soaring to the top of the _New York Times_ bestseller list.


----------



## Dale Texas

Parla said:


> In the US, they were called "sun signs" before the book came along. If they hadn't been, people would have supposed from the title that the work was a treatise on astronomy and it would have died an early death rather than soaring to the top of the _New York Times_ bestseller list.


 

It _is_ hard to imagine a straightforward book on science soaring to the top of _anyone's_ bestseller list minus the phantamagorically wonderful speculations of a Carl Sagen.


----------



## Andygc

Wordsmyth said:


> That's true for the sample of _all_ English publications, but if you run the ngram for 'British English' you see a completely different picture:


You might notice the very different frequency figures (left axis) for BE and AE. You can compare BE and AE usage of star sign and sun sign directly - like this.

Oops, edited to fix the link.


----------



## bennymix

I'm not sure any of the patterns make sense.   The British preference for 'star sign', is--objectively-- without rational basis as a 'sign'
has nothing much to do with the stars (leaving aside the Sun).

Note to Andy

Astrology is, as far as I'm concerned, meaningless twaddle - about as useful as homeopathy and less useful than a chocolate teapot

But maybe as fun as a chocolate teaspoon!

Checking the Daily Maily, today, reminds one that 'twaddle' may instrinsic to the medium...and one man's twaddle....


Author JK Rowling took to Twitter to answer the enduring question today (Friday) in an exchange with a fan who asked why one of Harry's children received the middle name of Severus - and it sparked a raging online debate.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...r-takes-Twitter-talk-Snape.html#ixzz3sjG9vM9G


----------



## Silver

I agree with Benny.

There's a translation training called "Daily Horoscope" in one of the local websites asking people to translate their own sign's daily "prediction" everyday. Sometimes it hits the nail.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Parla said:


> In the US, they were called "sun signs" before the book came along. If they hadn't been, people would have supposed from the title that the work was a treatise on astronomy and it would have died an early death rather than soaring to the top of the _New York Times_ bestseller list.


Fair enough. I guess ngrams don't tell the whole story.



Andygc said:


> You might notice the very different frequency figures (left axis) for BE and AE. You can compare BE and AE usage of star sign and sun sign directly - like this.


 Yes, I had noticed the different frequencies (and based my comments on my superb memory when flipping from one chart to the other) — I just couldn't be ar--d to run the combined chart: it's the faff of all those colons and underscores. 



bennymix said:


> The British preference for 'star sign', is--objectively-- without rational basis as a 'sign'
> has nothing much to do with the stars (leaving aside the Sun).


 Having just learned (from your #23, benny) that "'signs' are not constellations (though they bear the same names)", I can see why you say that "star sign" is not rational. 

But since I'm pretty sure most Brits' knowledge of the subject doesn't stretch to all that 'Moon, the planets, the ascendant and MC(?)' stuff that AutumnOwl mentioned, I think 'star sign' does follow a certain rationale, something like: "I see newspaper horoscopes with 12 signs of the zodiac. The signs have the names of constellations. Constellations are groups of stars. Ergo, 'star signs'." (No mention of "sun" anywhere in the Daily Mail horoscopes!)

Ws


----------



## bennymix

Hi Wordsmyth,

WS: (No mention of "sun" anywhere in the Daily Mail horoscopes!)

I agree as to your proposals about 'star signs.'
As to "sun" and "sun signs" I think you have to look around, my friend.   The 'horoscopes' of Sally Brompton are featured in the _Daily  Mail_, and a recent one reads as follows.   I've pasted a couple other bits from and about her, from her own website:

CANCER  22 June-23 July
You have faced more downs than ups in recent weeks, but now things are about to change. With both the Sun and Venus, planet of harmony, entering your birth sign this week, you can stop worrying about the past and start planning for the future.

[[In other words, Sun Moon and planets in signs is as common as dirt in her writing.]]


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you...-horoscopes-Sally-Brompton.html#ixzz3sl2GTIP6 
====
From her site:

Click on your Sun Sign at the top of the page or move the cursor on to one of the buttons on the left to embark upon your personal voyage of self-discovery

[her self description in part]
Sally Brompton is a professional astrologer and writer. 
She trained and worked with the world-renowned 
astrologer Patric Walker for many years until his death in 1995 
when she succeeded him as the astrologer for:
_The Mail_ on Sunday (UK)
_The New York Post _

_===_
_Sally Brompton for The Mail on Sunday | Daily Mail Online
www.dailymail.co.uk/home/.../Sally-Brompton-The-Mail-Sunday.html

Nov 20, 2015 - Sally Brompton brings you your stars for the next seven days. ...read ... Find out with Sally Brompton, Britain's most trusted astrologer. ...read ...
_


----------



## Wordsmyth

OK, benny, I plead guilty to having mentioned the _Daily Mail_ principally because, among UK tabloid rags, it probably runs second only to _The Sun_ in being the butt of derisive jokes. I would have used _The Sun_ as an example, except that that would have been rather confusing in the present context!

However, I was cautious enough to to do a quick check first, and googling for "Daily Mail horoscope" brought up this page (not by Sally Brompton) — nearly 100 lines of horoscope text, and not a single mention of the sun.


bennymix said:


> she succeeded him as the astrologer for:
> _The Mail_ _on Sunday_ (UK)
> _The New York Post _


 It seems that Sally Brompton writes essentially for the _Mail on Sunday_, not the _Daily Mail _(although both are grouped online in the Mail Online website).

Anyway, I'll modify what I said earlier about us Brits. Readers of Sally Brompton will probably be familiar with 'sun signs'. Readers of some other astrologers probably won't. And people who don't read horoscopes (the majority of the UK population in my experience, plus me), but have simply seen the signs of the zodiac here and there and probably know their own 'sign', would probably recognise the term 'star sign', but not 'sun sign' (see posts #9, 10, 12).



bennymix said:


> ... a 'sign' has nothing much to do with the stars (leaving aside the Sun).


Apparently the term 'star sign' would be entirely realistic if astrology were based on the Babylonian sidereal zodiac. (I'm not suggesting that astrology would be realistic, just the term 'star sign'.) However, Ptolemy messed up in the 2nd century AD by introducing the tropical zodiac, which was useful for about five minutes, but which is nonetheless systematically used by Western astrologers; (I'm surprised they don't also revert to the Julian calendar!)

Anyway, all is not lost. I was fascinated to read, here, that "_scientific proof of the sidereal zodiac as the authentic astrological zodiac [...] is the primary astrological research finding of the twentieth/twenty-first centuries. A secondary, but just as important, discovery_ _concerns the scientific verification of the astrological validity of the heliocentric/hermetic horoscope as an invaluable adjunct to the geocentric horoscope of traditional astrology"_. (Probably discovered by someone whose 'internal quest' was successful: see post #29.)

Ws
_[Edit: typo]_​


----------



## manfy

Wordsmyth said:


> _scientific proof of the sidereal zodiac as the authentic astrological zodiac [...] _


 
 That certainly sounds like a good marketing concept: Throw in some new scientific-sounding vocabulary, paired with some new, confusing charts and stars, and any true believer who is not happy with his/her current fate can pick and choose (and buy!) a brandnew one ...

For me that leaves only one question unanswered: How does destiny know which zodiac to follow ???


----------



## Andygc

Wordsmyth said:


> It seems that Sally Brompton writes essentially for the _Mail on Sunday_


Very little research - http://www.sallybrompton.com/pages/about_sally.htm - reveals her spread:


> The Mail on Sunday (UK)
> The New York Post
> TV Guide (USA)
> The Globe and Mail (Canada)
> Sally is also the astrologer for:
> The Daily (the world's first tablet newspaper)
> Seventeen (USA)
> The South China Morning Post
> and
> numerous other publications across the world
> She was the astrologer for
> Talk Magazine (USA) until its demise in 2001


She might be British, but it should be no surprise that she writes in American.


----------



## bennymix

Hi Wordsmyth,

Thanks for your comments.  Of course I'm not a fan of mass oriented newspapers, here, or in the UK.   We're simply talking, though, about word usage.   I believe Patric Walker, Brompton's teacher also wrote in widely circulated British publications.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/10/u...trologer-with-an-international-following.html


Let me respond to one of your comments:

WS:  Anyway, I'll modify what I said earlier about us Brits. Readers of Sally Brompton will probably be familiar with 'sun signs'. Readers of some other astrologers probably won't.
------

As far as the term 'sun signs'  I don't think familiarity with it is limited to Brompton's readers.
One British site mentions the following bit of history.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/Alan_Leo.html

Alan Leo is commonly thought of as being the first modern astrologer and is revered the world over amongst astrologers. Born William Frederick Allan in Westminster in 1860,...

[...] Lacey and Leo agreed to split the costs [of a magazine] between them and review the situation in a year's time.  The Astrologer's Magazine (renamed Modern Astrology in 1895) was launched on 21 November 1889.

In fact, Leo wrote a Sun sign book in 1909. The first edition of Everybody's Astrology, Volume 1 of Leo's Astrological Manuals, comprised chapters on the Sun in each of the twelve zodiac signs with no discussion of other astrological factors. In the second - and subsequent - editions, material was added to include Sun sign combined with Moon signs as well as short chapters on the other planets.  Leo argued that as life giver, the Sun is the single most important factor in the zodiac and therefore the birth chart.

===

More recently, I've already mentioned Charles Harvey, who was President of the the Astrological Association in Great Britain, 1973-93.   With his wife, Suzi Harvey, he wrote the following
book:

http://www.astrologer.com/bio/harvey.htm

Charles Harvey and Suzi Lilley-Harvey, _ Sun Sign, Moon Sign_. Discover the personality secrets of the 144 sun-moon combinations, Aquarian Harper Collins, (1994), ISBN 1357918642


----------



## bennymix

Thanks, Andy.   This is useful.   It would be an interesting inquiry to figure out how the
British preference for 'star sign' came to be so.   Probably the most obvious point is that
the Zodiac involves stars, even if the current 'signs' do not.   And there are bits of folk
wisdom and idiom about 'our fate' being 'in the stars' and so on.



Andygc said:


> You might notice the very different frequency figures (left axis) for BE and AE. You can compare BE and AE usage of star sign and sun sign directly - like this.
> 
> Oops, edited to fix the link.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Wordsmyth said:


> It seems that Sally Brompton writes essentially for the _Mail on Sunday_, not the _Daily Mail _(although both are grouped online in the Mail Online website).





Andygc said:


> Very little research - http://www.sallybrompton.com/pages/about_sally.htm - reveals her spread:


Yes, I'd noticed that. My comment wasn't precise enough. I should have said "It seems that, *within the Mail newspaper group (in the UK)*, Sally Brompton writes essentially for the _Mail on Sunday_, not the _Daily Mail _(although both are grouped online in the Mail Online website)". I was really just addressing benny's point about my comment on Daily Mail horoscopes.



bennymix said:


> As far as the term 'sun signs' I don't think familiarity with it is limited to Brompton's readers.


I'm sure you're right, benny. I only said "Readers of *some* other astrologers probably won't" [be familiar with 'sun signs']. Again, I should have been more precise. I really meant "Readers of *some* other *newspaper horoscope writers* probably won't". The example I linked to (in #40), with no mention of the sun, was written by a certain Jonathan Cainer.



bennymix said:


> It would be an interesting inquiry to figure out how the British preference for 'star sign' came to be so. Probably the most obvious point is that the Zodiac involves stars, even if the current 'signs' do not


That was what I had in mind earlier:


Wordsmyth said:


> I think 'star sign' does follow a certain rationale, something like: "I see newspaper horoscopes with 12 signs of the zodiac. The signs have the names of constellations. Constellations are groups of stars. Ergo, 'star signs'."


 But I don't have any scientific proof ...
.

_[Edit]:_ Although 'sun sign' seems to be better known in AmE, it's interesting to note Glen's comment:


Glenfarclas said:


> Because we don't call them "sun signs," Silver.


 Glen (AmE speaker) went for "What's your sign of the zodiac?", or "What's your astrological sign?" Those would appear to be better choices in an international environment.

Ws


----------



## ain'ttranslationfun?

Silverobama said:


> ...one of my pickup lines is "What's your sign".



Does it often work?  

< ---- > Off topic removed.  Cagey, moderator.


----------



## bennymix

Hi Wordsmyth,
I thought you might be interested in follow up.    You seem to suggest that Brompton is special in some way;  Andy goes so far as to say she "writes in American" because of her worldwide syndication.

The page you cite is apparently by Jonathan Cainer, judging by the ads for his products that are next to the text you mention.
He's another well-known British astrologer.

The following is from his own website, top of first page, and the bio lines are from a general UK astrological website:

http://www.cainer.com/zodiacguide/

Nobody is typical of their zodiac sign. We are all individuals and, in our full birth charts, based on our date, time and place of birth, we have all twelve signs operating on us. Your zodiac sign (we astrologers call it your Sun sign) is one of the stronger influences but it is not the only one. It can never, ever represent the be-all and end all of who you are. 
===

The Biography of Jonathan Cainer - Explore Astrology
www.exploreastrology.co.uk › Famous Astrologers

Sep 25, 2012 - Jonathan Cainer is a successful British astrologer. He has millions of fans who love his upbeat and positive style of astrology.
===

So the "sun sign" phrase is hardly unusual to him.

As to the general question, the commonness of "What's your sign" and the less common (though not rare, as Glen alleges)
"What's your sun sign", I think the explanation is rather easy.   By default "sign" refers to "sun sign" in these contexts.

Note that Harvey's book "Sun sign Moon Sign" mentions another sign, hence the 'sun' descriptor.

So I'd propose it's not really any mystery why the shorter form is used.  It's the same reason I don't say, "Did you get new shoes for your feet?"  'new shoes' by conversational default are assigned to a person, not his horse.


==============


Wordsmyth said:


> However, I was cautious enough to to do a quick check first, and googling for "Daily Mail horoscope" brought up this page (not by Sally Brompton) — nearly 100 lines of horoscope text, and not a single mention of the sun.





Wordsmyth said:


> Anyway, I'll modify what I said earlier about us Brits. Readers of Sally Brompton will probably be familiar with 'sun signs'. Readers of some other astrologers probably won't.


----------



## Cagey

This thread has gone on long enough.  The original question has been answered to the extent that any conclusive answer can be given. Discussion is drifting.

People who are interested in the topic are invited to read the thread and adopt the usage that they prefer. 

This thread is closed. 

Cagey, 
moderator.


----------

