« It Is A Very, Very Good Day | Main | Hamdan, Kennedy, and Separation of Powers »

March 30, 2006

Justice Scalia and the Quest for Original Meaning

A
s usual, Atrios is being demure. What Justice Scalia actually said in church the other day means ...

(Note: potentially offensive language below the fold)

Posted by Eric at March 30, 2006 9:50 AM

Comments

More like "Up yours!"

Posted by: Frank Catalina at March 30, 2006 11:16 AM

just an amazin lack of decorum from a Justice.
is this the decorum we can now expect from future Republican appointees to the High Court?
Scalia and Cheney represent the Worst of the politics of power and abuse of power, perhaps of the entire last one hundred years.

Posted by: CTheGee at March 30, 2006 11:31 AM

This guy's been watching The Sopranos too much. Can't wait for his next "episode!"

Posted by: Russ D'Anna at March 30, 2006 1:18 PM

More like "Up yours!"

Really? Because pretty much anyone with any experience in romance languages can tease apart the components of vaffanculo, even without the handy straight dope translation.

va - like spanish va, usually means "go"

fan - like french faire "do or make"

culo - exact word in spanish is "ass" or "butt"; french equivalent is cul.

And that's just "up yours?"

Posted by: paperwight at March 30, 2006 2:41 PM

Paperwight: Sometimes, taking a phrase apart, word by word, will not represent the true meaning. In this case, it means "you do it up your ass" which does not translate to 'up yours'. Scalia knew exactly what he was doing and saying, and it's numbnuts like you he depends upon.

Posted by: MaryAnn Spager at March 30, 2006 7:51 PM

Mary Ann,

What, exactly, do you think "up yours" means? I've always understood it to mean something quite like "taking it up the ass".

Posted by: Mike Heinz at March 30, 2006 9:50 PM

last i remeber, even justices on the high court still have free speech rights. While the speech isn't exactly the most politically correct, Scalia, like others, is subject to the sometimes excessive pursuit of the media photo op. While not socially acceptable, should we be so hard on a guy who is facing a rough couple terms on the court.

Posted by: thedonnybrook at March 30, 2006 10:39 PM

"Facing a rough couple terms on the court."

What?

The only tough thing for him is going to be figuring out the language for disassembling the Constitution in favor of W et al...

Posted by: Earl at March 31, 2006 9:35 AM

We cannot give these people ANY lattitude in their actions. These people are manifesting the most outrageous arrogance. They are breaking laws and lying to the American People. Cheney's declarations of F---You in the Senate chambers, Bush's use of "the Bird" in a photo op, now Scalia's undiplomatic expresion outside his church activity. These are all signs of the Republican graft, corruption and abuses of power. As my Italian friend used to say, I say to the Republicans, "Steggazzo!!"

Posted by: Jac at March 31, 2006 10:48 AM

Oh, sweet, sweet irony.

Posted by: Michael Heinz at March 31, 2006 12:26 PM

Stagazzo!? I Googled it and came up with nothing.
"Stick it"? As to the rest of your comment, Jac, I'm with you.

Posted by: david at March 31, 2006 12:37 PM

Earl, if you don't think this will be an interestingly tense term for the court, then you haven't read the opinions in Georgia v. Randolph, or listened to the arguments in the most recent Guantanamo Detainee case. With a strong conservative base now on the court, but with a chief justice who has so far demonstrated no control over the court, its going to be a hard year. Besides, Scalia votes in favor of Haliburton, not the President.

Posted by: theDonnybrook at March 31, 2006 1:38 PM

More like "Up yours!"

Test that hypothesis on Arthur Avenue in the Bronx.

Posted by: Andy Vance at March 31, 2006 1:41 PM

Hi guys,

"vaffanculo" is a Southern Italian (not necessarily dialectal; you can hear it often in Sicily, in Campania, and in Lazio, but even in the North) colloquial contraction for the (grammatically correct, but not exactly distinguished) exhortative sentence "vai a fare in culo", which means exactly the following:

vai -> go, imperative (no interpretation needed)
a fare -> to take [it] (fare is "to do", but as a very general verb it can be used in a lot of contexts with a more specific meaning)
in -> in, or rather up (both preposition are quite coincident when the offended interlocutor is standing)
culo -> [ your] ass (no lexical interpretation needed, and obviously belonging to the offended party)

When Italians want to euphemize it they say "vaffan ..." (which would be roughly equivalent to the quoted "up yours", in the sense that it studiously avoids the hardest word).
If Mr Scalia went to the bitter end, it means that he had pretty much lost control.


Cheers,

Posted by: Fernando at March 31, 2006 2:41 PM

Regarding "stegazzo!", it is also a contracted exhortation. And quite clear:

"Questo cazzo!"

In the contraction, "questo", becomes" 'sto ", and then, transforming dialectally the closing vowel in order to make the insult sound more fluid, " 'ste ",
And the initial "c" of "cazzo" is nasally pronounced in Southern Italy, making it "gazzo".

Questo -> This (demonstrative adjective, masculine singular)
cazzo -> dick (undoubtedly one of the most known italian taboo words; there is even a fairly famous gay bar in Berlin called like that).

The grammar is crystal-clear. The possible interpretations, however, are left to the imagination of the listener. In a chauvinist macho context (let's switch back to Southern Italy, away from Berlin), they are all offensive, since they exhort the listener to come and dare do 'something' with the proferred body part, of course proudly owned, and at least verbally displayed, by the offending party.

Cheers,

Posted by: Fernando at March 31, 2006 2:55 PM

I'm simply appalled that a sitting Justice would rely upon foreign obscenity when addressing domestic critics.

Especially when the suggested action would violate the offerer's policy preferences...

I suggest everyone tell Nino to go Cheney himself.

Posted by: fishbane at March 31, 2006 3:16 PM

At least he didn't take a shotgun and turn someone into a living version of the Bonnie and Clyde death car.

Thank the effective Boston Catholic Church for THAT!

Posted by: The Hat at March 31, 2006 6:23 PM

A minor reporter tries to boost a flagging career with a crass photo op of someone who - unlike her - actually matters. The worst one might say of Scalia's conduct in this business would have been that he didn't tell her to f*ck off.

Posted by: Simon at March 31, 2006 10:33 PM

i thought scalia was opposed to use of foreign authorities in making his points.

Posted by: nc_litigator at April 3, 2006 11:47 AM

I'm simply appalled that a sitting Justice would rely upon foreign obscenity when addressing domestic critics.

Wow, climb off your ivory tower for just a sec, mkay? Guess what: there are a lot of Italian AMERICANS who wouldn't think of that as a "foreign obscenity." I'm guessing you never knew any Italian Americans though.
(rolling eyes)

Posted by: Whatever at April 4, 2006 8:05 PM