DIVERSION [from the Longwoods eLetter of July 31, 2007]

If you don’t know Longwoods from Adam’s off ox would you be reading this eLetter?

[We were looking for a creative explanation . . . and got one we liked. –Thanks to Carol Connolly from Aspen Regional Health Authority in Alberta who gets a one-year free subscription to everything Longwoods produces.]

Carol writes: The short answer to your question is yes but the reason why will take a little longer. I think the key factor that would encourage an individual to read the eLetter is curiosity or maybe just plain nosiness. As a health care professional with a strong interest in knowledge transfer and research I want to know what is happening in health care not only here in Canada but across the world. Thus when I saw a notice in “Healthclips” commenting on knowledge transfer and culture change I clicked which lead me to the eLetter and now to your diversion. Of course the diversion lead to a quick search on “Adam’s off ox” which is not an expression I was familiar with. World Wide Words tells me “It’s one of a whole set of expressions of which the basic and oldest form is not to know somebody from Adam, meaning that the person is entirely unknown to the speaker.” So what if you don’t know Longwoods from Adam or from anything else for that matter what should entice you to read the eLetter is the content within the eLetter. If that content is up-to-date, applicable to your area of interest and covering a broad range of topics including conferences of interest chances are you will look for it again or as in my case subscribe for regular delivery. It is really up to the reader to undertake the critical analysis of the information provided in any newsletter or article to determine its true value in your work environment. Bottom line Longwood is providing a service by pulling the information together in one easy to read format yet I don’t need to know Longwood’s rather I need to be curious and want to learn a little more. It doesn’t hurt that the eLetter also gave me a few moments of distraction from my work and let me remember Peter Gzowski one of our great Canadians!! Thanks for the moment.

----------------------------------------------------------

[Editor’s note: here is a fuller explanation from an etymologist]

Question: Several years ago, Bill Clinton used a phrase in a public speech that I am having a hard time remembering both the phrase and the meaning of the phrase. It was something like "Adam's off Ox". I recall at the time, there was some discussion in the media about the phrase and what it means, since most people were unfamiliar with it. If anyone can help, I would appreciate it.

Answer: That's because the media is made up of a lot of city people.

ADAM'S OFF OX - "The form commonly used is 'not to know one from Adam's off ox,' meaning to have not the slightest information about the person indicated. The saying in any form, however, is another of the numerous ones commonly heard but of which no printed record has been found. But in 1848 the author of a book on 'Nantucketisms' recorded a saying then in use on that island, 'Poor as God's off ox,' which, he said, meant very poor. It is possible that on the mainland 'Adam' was used as a euphemistic substitute. The off ox, in a yoke of oxen, is the one on the right of the team. Because it is the farthest from the driver it cannot be so well seen and may therefore get the worst of the footing. It is for that reason that 'off ox' has been used figuratively to designate a clumsy or awkward person." From "A Hog on Ice" by Charles Earle Funk (1948, Harper & Row).