Talk:Shiver my timbers

message: Forgive me, but this page is slightly wrong.
Firstly, 'to shiver' does not exactly mean 'to shatter into small pieces', but literally 'to splinter'. A 'shiver' is a splinter in some dialects of English (that is, mine).
Next, me is not grammatically incorrect, but rather it is the way my is pronounced in some accents (again, mine own).
I must point out these facts, for this phrase is, to my ears, perfectly good English, however odd it may sound to you. Oswax 21:33, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Corrections

message: I have a caricature probably from the first decade of the nineteenth century which depicts an English sailor saying "Shiver my top-sails!".  This probably indicates that the "shiver my X" phraseology went back even further, since this "shiver my top-sails" sounds like probably an altered version of some other original form of the expression. Churchh 07:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical dating

message: If we are going to have "shiver me timbers" redirected to this page we should really have that phrase in the first paragraph. Since the two phrases are claimed to have equivalent meaning, there should be no philosophical problem with stating that information up front. Since "shiver me timbers" is also an exclamation in the form of a mock oath usually attributed to the speech of pirates in works of fiction, employed as a literary device by authors to express shock, surprise or annoyance, there is no reason NOT to include that in the first paragraph. From Wikipedia:Redirect#What needs to be done on pages that are targets of redirects we see "We follow the "principle of least astonishment" — after following a redirect, the reader's first question is likely to be: "hang on ... I wanted to read about this. Why has the link taken me to that?". Make it clear to the reader that they have arrived in the right place. Normally, we try to make sure that all "inbound redirects" are mentioned in the first couple of paragraphs of the article." j-beda 17:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I see a few problems. 1) Except for the last sentence or two, the article is about "shiver my timbers" - saying "my" or "me" gives them equal weight, which is confusing to what the article is about. 2) Just because a link redirects to an article doesn't mean it should be in the lead section. In fact most redirects, in most articles, they are not mentioned in the lead section. 3) "me timbers" is already bold  - do we need two instances of this phrase being bold? -- Stbalbach 22:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most redirects of alternate spellings DO mention that in the first part of the article (see colour and humour for example), most redirects of alternate naming do too (see Education Savings Account and English Pale for example). I suppose it depends on what the purpose of the article is thought to be. If the purpose is just to talk about the meaning and history and use of "shiver my timbers" to the exclusion of all else, then of course only the mearest mention of the other would be needed, with a completely seperate article about "shiver me timbers". Of course doing that would soon result in someone proposing that the two articles be merged, as they would be largely redundant. If however the article is about the most commonly used phrase and its historic development, then having both phrases promanent seems to be warranted. If we look at how someone is likely to arrive at the article, they are either following a link from another page (International Talk Like a Pirate Day and This Morning With Richard Not Judy seems to be the only ones right now) or searched for the phrase directly - since "me" seems more commonly used than "my", they are likely to be looking for that. j-beda 16:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I got rid of the 2nd bolding, so that is not an issue. j-beda 16:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "shiver my timbers" is a legitimate phrase actually found in the OED, it is the correct phrase, derived from "my timbers" as in "my goodness" (not "me goodness"). Somewhere someone started a slang variation with "me timbers", but it is not "proper" English. So we have a proper English phrase, and a slang phrase. I think since this is an encyclopedia, we should show some difference between what is proper English, and what is a slang derivative, even if the slang is popular. -- Stbalbach 17:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point - and a statement to that effect might be appropriate, however one should keep in mind for articles of this type that they are rarely about formal written English, and so adjectives such as "proper" and "slang" are not generally very applicable - the phrrase in question is (supposedly) a verbal exclamation - it is going to be slangy by its very nature! The point of an encyclopedia (and even a reference such as the OED) is to document behaviour, rather than proscribe behaviour.  Documenting slang usage, dialects, and the evolution of the language certainly seem to be proper province of an encyclopedia. The current opening which Stbalbach has made ("Shiver my timbers (often misquoted as Shiver me timbers) is an exclamation...") seems like an excellent way of handling this particular issue. j-beda 18:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It should be noted that 'me' is a common usage instead of 'my' in the English Midlands (specifically North Warwickshire) and has nothing to do with accent. An example would be when saying "I will get it myself", the person from the Midlands would say "I will get it me sen" ('sen' meaning 'self').
Comments? -- Stbalbach 14:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "shiver me timbers"

message: Tom Waits has a song called "Shiver me Timbers". 
Would it be interesting to mention it as an example of a recent example of the expression "shiver me timbers"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.117.40.134 (talk) 09:34, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Tom Waits

message: It just came to my attention that a "shiver" is a group of sharks. There is currently no evidence given about the original meaning of the phrase. I imagine "well surround my ship with sharks" is also a useful exclamation. So if any etymology enthusiasts would like to research this - is it a verb or the collective noun? please do. :) Claritywhisk (talk) 04:10, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sharks 

message: I suggest that, just as 'Jumping Jehoshaphat' and 'Jiminy Crickets' and 'Great Caesar's Ghost' are deliberate solecisms for 'Jesus Christ', that 'shiver me timbers' is a substitute for 'shit!' as an exclamation of surprise and/or fear. It is deliberately humorous, something a real sailor is unlikely to say, and the author(s) who first used it may have taken a sly pleasure in getting it past the censor.
'Avast, ye scuts!' is another one that slipped through the wicket keeper.
Scuts (scuttles) are the vents that drain the deck when a big sea washes over it.
But a 'scut' is also the anus. A rabbit's 'scut' is what a hunter might see bounding off into the undergrowth.
The pirate who yells 'Avast ye scuts' is saying 'Stop it, you arseholes!' 2001:44B8:3102:BB00:3850:F72B:1E2C:BE62 (talk) 20:26, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A solecism ? 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Shiver My Timbers (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 06:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress