On OEDILF Mephistopheles and I wrote what we considered a tasteful limerick on Auschwitz. The appropriateness of it is now being considered.
In reading about it, I found that "Auschwitz" isn't in OED. Why would that be?
"Chicago" is there, defined as: "The name of the city in Illinois, U.S.A., used attrib. or in Comb. in various special collocations (see quots.).
"London" is there, defined as: "the name of the capital of England, used attrib. in various special collocations"
"New York" is there, defined as: " 1. a. Designating things originating in, characteristic of, or associated with the city or (less frequently) state of New York."
Some cities are there, and some aren't. Los Angeles and Paris (the city) aren't there.
Still, wouldn't you think that Auschwitz would be there? I find that awfully strange.
Very interesting question, Arnie; I wish I'd thought of it! The answer confuses me even more. While Belsen is there, with precisely the definition that Auschwitz, Treblinka, or Dachau might have, the latter 3 are not in the OED.
Belsen: "The name of a concentration camp in Germany in the war of 1939-45, applied hyperbolically to any very unpleasant place. Also attrib. and Comb."
In a standard dictionary place names are only there if they're part of a common noun. So London is required as an introduction to London pride, the plant, Oxford for Oxford bags, Hungary for Hungary water, and so on; a place that's not part of a compound named after it doesn't get a mention. Or it may have an entry because it itself is used as a name of a type: "a Shangri-La", "a new Eden".
Actually Belsen doesn't seem to fit nearly as well as Auschwitz. It's a bit hard to web-search for non-literal uses, but "the Auschwitz of" does get quite a few. I don't think "we must avoid another X" or "the X of the Balkans/the North" is a distinct use: it's just a direct evocation of the original place. Nor need it on the other hand have drifted as far away as "Mecca" ("the mecca of"... has all sorts of things). But you do get a fair number where "the Auschwitz of" is being used as if it's a word of the language, and almost none for the other camps.
I agree. A clue why Belsen appears but not Auschwitz might be this line from the Wikipedia entry on Belsen:
quote:
After the war, the name "Belsen" became proverbial and emotive for skinnyness of humans and confinement in suffering, and was often re-applied metaphorically to various situations, often casually and inappropriately.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I wonder, is there a British/American difference on this maybe? I mean, most Americans would immediately come up with Auschwitz first when thinking of concentration camps. Is it different in England?
It may have to do with Belsen being liberated by the British Army and Auschwitz being liberated by the Soviet Red Army. And, the American Army liberated Dachau.
Belsen was liberated by the allies before Dachau, on 15 April 1945 compared with 29 April. It is likely that its horrors therefore became public knowledge first, causing its name to become used metaphorically rather than Dachau.
As zmj says, Auschwitz was liberated by the Red Army and it is quite likely that the full truth about the atrocities there wasn't known in the West until some time afterwards, even though it was 'freed' on 27 January 1945.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Yes, I would associate Auschwitz with the atrocities first. Belsen is not as well-known over here. I wonder why that is, really. Odd, don't you think, that we'd have a different reference for this?
******* "Happiness is not something ready made. It comes from your own actions. ~Dalai Lama
It may well be different depending on the country. I can't really think what name would come to me first, but I suspect it might be Belsen. I can remember when I was much younger someone who was extremely thin might sometimes be described as a Belson boy. Thankfully I haven't heard the phrase for years.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
