Just came back from the University of Washington library (they have a Dept. of Library Sciences). Let me say that RQ is a delightful periodical highly recommended! Mostly news (“the University of Michigan just upgraded their card catalog for $200,000”) and bylaws of the Association. Oh, and book reviews for reference librarians: no reference library should be without the Guide to flowers and plants that have appeared on postage stamps (this necessary 122-page volume troubles to list multiple common names along with the Latin and date of stamp issue, a strong plus in the reviewer’s opinion). More importantly, they have a “letters” section for reference librarians to ask the larger community questions from patrons that have stumped them… chief among these are questions about idioms and phrases. So it’s the sort of thing they very well might cover.
Now the news. I can confirm that in the 1960-1964 volumes (several read-throughs), the phrase as a whole does not appear (sigh). I can’t absolutely confirm it was a false positive - I found multiple instances of “nine” and “whole” but not “yards”, which would only be too easy to miss. The real problem, though, is that these slim periodicals were bound in a single volume covering 1960-1968. RQ seems to have hit its stride around 1965 and expanded length considerably, and I ran out of time. The problem (with these being bound) is that Google’s result is extremely noninformative on whether the hit came from vol 1 alone or some bound version covering multiple years. But, at the very least, there’s no entry predating the 1964 true positive that google came up with. Given the fact that they have sections devoted to finding idiom sources, it’s very possible that some post-65 entry actually attempts to look at the phrase.
And, as a plus, by being there today I confirmed my alpha-geek status and gave a bored, very professional reference librarian something to puzzle in a deserted library in a university out-of-session an hour before holiday closing time. For that, I thank you google.
books.google.com also claims that the full phrase is contained in the 1961 version of Index de périodiques canadiens: Part 2 but doesn’t give any issue information or page numbers because that would make it too easy.
Actually, not that it matters, but we’re up to nine now. I’m pretty sure this is the complete list as it now stands. (Items 6 through 9 are obviously all clustered together and are more or less contemporaneous.)
1966 (published early 1967), multiple instances of “the whole nine yards” (and variants) in Doom Pussy, e.g., http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0410e&L=ads-l&P=3120 and http://www.wordorigins.org/index.php/site/comments/whole_nine_yards_the/ (Is there a concise listing elsewhere of all examples to be found in Doom Pussy?)
By the way, I’m sure that samclem and others here can correct me on this, but I seem to recall that when the RQ and Index de périodiques canadiens hits were more visible (when snippet views of these texts were available in Google Books), it was pretty clear that both postdated 1967 and consequently went untouched by those actively searching for early appearances of this phrase (because these “late” publication dates were clear). As strange as it may sound, I’m recalling that “the whole nine yards” that appeared in Index de périodiques canadiens came from a collection of reminiscences or similar by various (recent) U.S. Presidents. That text reverted to “no preview” only in the last month or two.
Interesting.
I first heard this in the 60s as a navy recruit as a reference to the “yards” on a sailing vessel that the “sheets” are “bent” to.
A three master having nine of them.
“All nine yards”, therefore indicating that all main sails are set.
I guess old bos’ns have tales much as their flying brethren.
It must be remembered when using Google Book search that the date shown for serial publications such as quarterlies, etc, is the publication date of the first issue, not the date of the issue containing the searched phrase. The only way to confirm the real date is to hotfoot it to the library in question and check the physical copy, rarely an option for most of us alas.
If the title of the second text that **Peter Morris **has dug up is correct, the sighting dates to the 1980s. The work itself describes a report issued by the Ninety-Eighth Congress, which met from 1983 to 1985. (The RQ sighting has been discussed above.)
“Sheets” are not “bent” to “yards” on a sailing vessel; a sheet is a line leading to the lower corner of a sail. Any three-masted full-rigged ship from reasonably late in the age of sail would have had more than 9 yards; that would indicate a course, a topsail, and a t’gallent on each mast. In the 18th and 19th centuries most ships would have split topsails, split t’gallents, and likely a royal if not a skyscraper yard. The Flying Cloud looks to have had 15 yards.
And it is extremely unlikely that a phrase originating in sailing ships would first appear in the 1960’s.
This story is “Man on the Thresh-Hold” which appeared in the Fall 1962 issue of Michigan’s Voices. It’s by Robert E. Wegner. A little Googling found a person by this name who might very well be the one who wrote the story. There’s a Robert E. Wegner who’s an Emeritus Professor of English at Alma College in Alma, Michigan. He was already teaching there in 1962. Has anyone contacted him and asked him about how he happened to use “the whole nine yards”?
I don’t believe anyone on the American Dialect Society Listserv (where Stephen Goranson introduced the 1962 find and where much “whole nine yards” discussion takes place) ever announced that he or she was actively trying to contact the author of the 1962 piece (and certainly no one ever announced that he or she had been in touch with Mr. Wegner).
If you’re game, Wendell Wagner, why don’t you try contacting Alma College’s Prof. Wegner? (You may need to use snail mail, but still.) You certainly know enough about the topic to explore this 1962 usage with its presumed, well, user.
Am I the only one desperately hoping his answer isn’t something like “Gosh, I have no idea, that was a long time ago. Just something I heard somewhere”?
Specious. The joke is long and isn’t that funny. Hard to imagine how the phrase would have transitioned to mainstream usage. Also, uncorroborated memories from 50 years ago are next to worthless in terms of probative value.
To be fair to Quinion, that anecdote is at the end of a long article examining all the candidates. He acknowledges the frailty of memories and doesn’t actually say that’s the answer. And the reference comes from Barry Popik, who is one of the kings of the origins world.
Go back through the trail of links and you find Popik’s summary of all the major pages, cites, stories, and memories.
I was thinking of other avenues for exploring this, and found a newspaper archive site that lists an article from 1964 called “Talking Hip in the Space Age” (or “How to Talk Hip in the Space Age”)
It’s listed in both the Tucson Daily Citizen - April 25, 1964 (Tucson, Arizona) and the Salt Lake Tribune, The - May 3, 1964 (Salt Lake City, Utah)