Advertising - LEO without ads? LEO Pur
LEO

It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.

Would you like to support LEO?

Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.

 
  •  
  • Topic

    it fits where it touches

    Comment
    What are your opinions about the meaning of this saying? Does it mean that a garment is too big, or too small?

    I have often heard it used to mean that an article of clothing was too tight, but this seems illogical when you analyse the phrase itself.

    Yesterday I thought of this when trying on a suit in a shop. The skirt was miles too big (didn't touch anywhere, except perhaps the waistband on the hips) and the jacket only fitted (touched) in one place and stuck out everywhere else. Therefore, in such a situation, it would seem logical to say "it fits where it touches", as where it doesn't touch it is too big.

    If, however, a garment is too tight, then logically it touches everywhere. So why do people use this expression to mean that a garment is too small?
    AuthorMary (nz/A)09 May 06, 19:55
    Comment
    I have always understood it to mean that the garment was far too tight - I take the point about the illogicality; I had never thought of that. I assumed that the point was that it did touch everywhere, i.e. that it touched far too much, and in that sense it fitted - not that it fitted in the sense of looking at all good on a person.
    #1AuthorSammy09 May 06, 20:19
    Comment
    Thanks Sammy. I have only heard it to mean (unflatteringly) tight, too, but it always struck me as illogical.
    #2AuthorMary (nz/A)09 May 06, 20:26
    Comment
    @ Mary: On a side-line: If you are trying-on suits, does it mean that you got (possibly) paid for "March/April/May/June and July"?
    Don't put on any weight though (5 Kg) as your new suit may fit you where it touches . . .

    #3AuthorDaddy 09 May 06, 21:28
    Comment
    No Daddy, I still haven't been paid (for March or any subsequent months) - I was just trying it on out of curiosity (no temptation to buy things when completely broke). Besides, I think I would need to put on at least 5kg for it to fit me (though maybe it wouldn't then either - the shop assistant said that the suit was clearly designed for giantesses with a sunken chest ;-)...)
    #4AuthorMary (nz/A)09 May 06, 21:58
    Comment
    And on what, Mary, do you live on? (love and whatsoever?) - Would a Care-Paket help ?
    #5AuthorDaddy09 May 06, 22:13
    Comment
    RE: >>but this seems illogical when you analyse the phrase itself. <<<
    "it fits where it *touches*, but otherwise it squeezes/strangles"
    Ist für mich nicht unlogisch ;-))
    #6Authorjudex09 May 06, 22:18
    Comment
    @judex: von diesem Gesichspunkt hatte ich es nicht betrachtet!

    @Daddy: Thanks for your concern. My elderly neighbour invited me to lunch last week and lent me what he could spare for groceries (funny how only the people who have little themselves are able to be generous). Otherwise I would be down to half a packet of pasta and 1 cup of flour. I cook rice or pasta with vegetables (if I have any) at work. And a friend invited me to dinner at the weekend, so I have already put on 500g. (My company doesn't care if I starve, obviously.) :°-(
    #7AuthorMary (nz/A)09 May 06, 22:55
    Comment
    I have always understood it to mean "It doesn't fit" (i.e. it fits where it happens to fit), rather like the parson's egg (good in parts).
    #8AuthorMike E.09 May 06, 23:15
    Comment
    So in that case, Mike, it could be either too big or too small?
    #9AuthorMary (nz/A)09 May 06, 23:18
    Comment
    I've heard it was used for the uniforms soldiers were issued with - of notoriously poor fit - and they would be told that they would "grow into it" or it would "stretch/shrink in the wash", whatever seemed most appropriate.
    So yes, a poor fit either too big or too small - could apply to a shapeless sack or minimal/ultratight clothing that leaves little to the imagination.

    @Mike E.
    the curate's egg (Punch, 9 November 1895)
    #10AuthorMarianne (BE)10 May 06, 07:15
    Comment
    @Mary
    <<So in that case, Mike, it could be either too big or too small? >>
    That's how I've always understood it -- or, perhaps, the wrong shape, rather than specifically too big or small. It reminds me of the joke about the man who fitted his suit only by means of all sorts of contortions.

    @Marianne
    <<the curate's egg (Punch, 9 November 1895) >>
    My excuse is that it was before my time. (:-)
    #11AuthorMike E.10 May 06, 07:40
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
 ­ automatisch zu ­ ­ umgewandelt