> I've nothing pre-dating the OED's 1867 citation from Harpers. But of
> course
> since my thesis, FWIW, would have been lunker > lunkhead > lunk a later
> date
> for lunk doesn't, in principle, worry me.
>
> CW
I'm dubious about the "lunker" link, Chris. I'd be happy simply to
back-track "lunk" itself. It *feels* older than any of the earliest
recorded instances.
Back to fleshing-out last night's post.
Robin
|