I've got my work cut out for me. Origin, meaning, negation by sarcasm?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The phrase "I've got my work cut out for me" I have until now mistaken to mean: "The work that I have to do is largely completed (due to efforts by others beforehand), and only need to do a little bit more to finish". But I find that it actually means "The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete".
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true only if used in sarcasm?
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to know about its first appearance.
phrase-meaning phrase-usage
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 5 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The phrase "I've got my work cut out for me" I have until now mistaken to mean: "The work that I have to do is largely completed (due to efforts by others beforehand), and only need to do a little bit more to finish". But I find that it actually means "The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete".
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true only if used in sarcasm?
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to know about its first appearance.
phrase-meaning phrase-usage
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 5 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
The expression can be found at idioms.thefreedictionary.com and the origin (including the sense you query) at WorldWideWords.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:41
Of course, 'a little bit more [on each one] to finish' becomes 'The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete' if enough cut-outs have been prepared. And the 'little bit' was probably 90% of the task.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:59
@EdwinAshworth Ah, I seem to have taken the two meanings as being opposite, but as you point out, it is more nuanced than that. By the use of this idiom, it is apparent that there is work to do, but the quantity and difficulty of the work may differ according to the view of the speaker. It seems to me that the idiom augments the quantity and difficulty of the work, and so most listeners would deem that the speaker was faced with a lot of work to do if they said they'd "had their work cut out" for them.
– fejoa
Jun 4 at 23:49
I think you’re confusing “cut out for you” with “cut down for you” to cut down is to reduce.
– Jim
4 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
The phrase "I've got my work cut out for me" I have until now mistaken to mean: "The work that I have to do is largely completed (due to efforts by others beforehand), and only need to do a little bit more to finish". But I find that it actually means "The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete".
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true only if used in sarcasm?
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to know about its first appearance.
phrase-meaning phrase-usage
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
The phrase "I've got my work cut out for me" I have until now mistaken to mean: "The work that I have to do is largely completed (due to efforts by others beforehand), and only need to do a little bit more to finish". But I find that it actually means "The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete".
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true only if used in sarcasm?
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to know about its first appearance.
phrase-meaning phrase-usage
phrase-meaning phrase-usage
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
edited Jun 4 at 23:38
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
asked Jun 1 at 0:27
fejoa
295
295
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 5 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 5 hours ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
The expression can be found at idioms.thefreedictionary.com and the origin (including the sense you query) at WorldWideWords.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:41
Of course, 'a little bit more [on each one] to finish' becomes 'The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete' if enough cut-outs have been prepared. And the 'little bit' was probably 90% of the task.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:59
@EdwinAshworth Ah, I seem to have taken the two meanings as being opposite, but as you point out, it is more nuanced than that. By the use of this idiom, it is apparent that there is work to do, but the quantity and difficulty of the work may differ according to the view of the speaker. It seems to me that the idiom augments the quantity and difficulty of the work, and so most listeners would deem that the speaker was faced with a lot of work to do if they said they'd "had their work cut out" for them.
– fejoa
Jun 4 at 23:49
I think you’re confusing “cut out for you” with “cut down for you” to cut down is to reduce.
– Jim
4 hours ago
add a comment |
The expression can be found at idioms.thefreedictionary.com and the origin (including the sense you query) at WorldWideWords.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:41
Of course, 'a little bit more [on each one] to finish' becomes 'The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete' if enough cut-outs have been prepared. And the 'little bit' was probably 90% of the task.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:59
@EdwinAshworth Ah, I seem to have taken the two meanings as being opposite, but as you point out, it is more nuanced than that. By the use of this idiom, it is apparent that there is work to do, but the quantity and difficulty of the work may differ according to the view of the speaker. It seems to me that the idiom augments the quantity and difficulty of the work, and so most listeners would deem that the speaker was faced with a lot of work to do if they said they'd "had their work cut out" for them.
– fejoa
Jun 4 at 23:49
I think you’re confusing “cut out for you” with “cut down for you” to cut down is to reduce.
– Jim
4 hours ago
The expression can be found at idioms.thefreedictionary.com and the origin (including the sense you query) at WorldWideWords.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:41
The expression can be found at idioms.thefreedictionary.com and the origin (including the sense you query) at WorldWideWords.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:41
Of course, 'a little bit more [on each one] to finish' becomes 'The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete' if enough cut-outs have been prepared. And the 'little bit' was probably 90% of the task.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:59
Of course, 'a little bit more [on each one] to finish' becomes 'The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete' if enough cut-outs have been prepared. And the 'little bit' was probably 90% of the task.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:59
@EdwinAshworth Ah, I seem to have taken the two meanings as being opposite, but as you point out, it is more nuanced than that. By the use of this idiom, it is apparent that there is work to do, but the quantity and difficulty of the work may differ according to the view of the speaker. It seems to me that the idiom augments the quantity and difficulty of the work, and so most listeners would deem that the speaker was faced with a lot of work to do if they said they'd "had their work cut out" for them.
– fejoa
Jun 4 at 23:49
@EdwinAshworth Ah, I seem to have taken the two meanings as being opposite, but as you point out, it is more nuanced than that. By the use of this idiom, it is apparent that there is work to do, but the quantity and difficulty of the work may differ according to the view of the speaker. It seems to me that the idiom augments the quantity and difficulty of the work, and so most listeners would deem that the speaker was faced with a lot of work to do if they said they'd "had their work cut out" for them.
– fejoa
Jun 4 at 23:49
I think you’re confusing “cut out for you” with “cut down for you” to cut down is to reduce.
– Jim
4 hours ago
I think you’re confusing “cut out for you” with “cut down for you” to cut down is to reduce.
– Jim
4 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to
know about its first appearance.
To have (one's) work cut out for one is from 1610s; to have it prepared and prescribed, hence, to have all one can handle. Old English weorc (n), wircan, wyrcan (vb); related to Old High German wurchen, German wirken, Old Norse yrkja, Gothic waurkjan] etymonline.com
More etymology here: worldwidewords
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than
being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true
only if used in sarcasm?
My sense is no to both of your questions.
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
add a comment |
up vote
-5
down vote
You know how when you're up against, or about to be up against, a big task and the person giving you the task is seemingly rambling on and on, seemingly "cutting" out a huge piece of work for your share of the overall task at hand.
Most work or simple tasks require little pre-planning, let alone someone blabbering on with a list of jobs specifically and solely for you to take on. So because of this, you can really feel like your work has been cut out for you. Likely cut large, unproportionately to your desire.
As for the origins.. I have no clue! Just blabbering!
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to
know about its first appearance.
To have (one's) work cut out for one is from 1610s; to have it prepared and prescribed, hence, to have all one can handle. Old English weorc (n), wircan, wyrcan (vb); related to Old High German wurchen, German wirken, Old Norse yrkja, Gothic waurkjan] etymonline.com
More etymology here: worldwidewords
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than
being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true
only if used in sarcasm?
My sense is no to both of your questions.
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to
know about its first appearance.
To have (one's) work cut out for one is from 1610s; to have it prepared and prescribed, hence, to have all one can handle. Old English weorc (n), wircan, wyrcan (vb); related to Old High German wurchen, German wirken, Old Norse yrkja, Gothic waurkjan] etymonline.com
More etymology here: worldwidewords
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than
being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true
only if used in sarcasm?
My sense is no to both of your questions.
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to
know about its first appearance.
To have (one's) work cut out for one is from 1610s; to have it prepared and prescribed, hence, to have all one can handle. Old English weorc (n), wircan, wyrcan (vb); related to Old High German wurchen, German wirken, Old Norse yrkja, Gothic waurkjan] etymonline.com
More etymology here: worldwidewords
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than
being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true
only if used in sarcasm?
My sense is no to both of your questions.
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
Also, I am curious about the origin of this phrase, and would love to
know about its first appearance.
To have (one's) work cut out for one is from 1610s; to have it prepared and prescribed, hence, to have all one can handle. Old English weorc (n), wircan, wyrcan (vb); related to Old High German wurchen, German wirken, Old Norse yrkja, Gothic waurkjan] etymonline.com
More etymology here: worldwidewords
Is there any evidence that supports the former meaning, other than
being used in a sarcastic context? Or, can the former meaning be true
only if used in sarcasm?
My sense is no to both of your questions.
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
edited Jun 1 at 0:53
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
answered Jun 1 at 0:44
lbf
16.5k21561
16.5k21561
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
-5
down vote
You know how when you're up against, or about to be up against, a big task and the person giving you the task is seemingly rambling on and on, seemingly "cutting" out a huge piece of work for your share of the overall task at hand.
Most work or simple tasks require little pre-planning, let alone someone blabbering on with a list of jobs specifically and solely for you to take on. So because of this, you can really feel like your work has been cut out for you. Likely cut large, unproportionately to your desire.
As for the origins.. I have no clue! Just blabbering!
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
add a comment |
up vote
-5
down vote
You know how when you're up against, or about to be up against, a big task and the person giving you the task is seemingly rambling on and on, seemingly "cutting" out a huge piece of work for your share of the overall task at hand.
Most work or simple tasks require little pre-planning, let alone someone blabbering on with a list of jobs specifically and solely for you to take on. So because of this, you can really feel like your work has been cut out for you. Likely cut large, unproportionately to your desire.
As for the origins.. I have no clue! Just blabbering!
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
add a comment |
up vote
-5
down vote
up vote
-5
down vote
You know how when you're up against, or about to be up against, a big task and the person giving you the task is seemingly rambling on and on, seemingly "cutting" out a huge piece of work for your share of the overall task at hand.
Most work or simple tasks require little pre-planning, let alone someone blabbering on with a list of jobs specifically and solely for you to take on. So because of this, you can really feel like your work has been cut out for you. Likely cut large, unproportionately to your desire.
As for the origins.. I have no clue! Just blabbering!
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
You know how when you're up against, or about to be up against, a big task and the person giving you the task is seemingly rambling on and on, seemingly "cutting" out a huge piece of work for your share of the overall task at hand.
Most work or simple tasks require little pre-planning, let alone someone blabbering on with a list of jobs specifically and solely for you to take on. So because of this, you can really feel like your work has been cut out for you. Likely cut large, unproportionately to your desire.
As for the origins.. I have no clue! Just blabbering!
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
answered Jun 1 at 0:42
Hunter Frazier
4021210
4021210
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
add a comment |
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
I had never heard of your mistaken usage before, or supposedly mistaken. Not saying one way is correct or not. I had never thought of it in your way until now, although it seems it makes sense in some contexts. Depends on the tone and expression a lot for this one I suppose.
– Hunter Frazier
Jun 1 at 0:45
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f448590%2five-got-my-work-cut-out-for-me-origin-meaning-negation-by-sarcasm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
The expression can be found at idioms.thefreedictionary.com and the origin (including the sense you query) at WorldWideWords.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:41
Of course, 'a little bit more [on each one] to finish' becomes 'The work I have to do is going to be difficult, and will take tremendous time and effort to complete' if enough cut-outs have been prepared. And the 'little bit' was probably 90% of the task.
– Edwin Ashworth
Jun 1 at 0:59
@EdwinAshworth Ah, I seem to have taken the two meanings as being opposite, but as you point out, it is more nuanced than that. By the use of this idiom, it is apparent that there is work to do, but the quantity and difficulty of the work may differ according to the view of the speaker. It seems to me that the idiom augments the quantity and difficulty of the work, and so most listeners would deem that the speaker was faced with a lot of work to do if they said they'd "had their work cut out" for them.
– fejoa
Jun 4 at 23:49
I think you’re confusing “cut out for you” with “cut down for you” to cut down is to reduce.
– Jim
4 hours ago