Date:    Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:45:59 +0000
<br>From:    Jim Rader  jrader[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]M-W.COM 
<br>Subject: Re: cool beans
<br>
<br>I tried to run a quick Nexis search on this collocation, but the
<br>result was hundreds of recipes that tell you to cool the beans, so I
<br>restricted the search to earlier years.  The first cite I could find was
<br>
<br>Washington Post, Apr. 16, 1992, Maryland Weekly (Montgomery), p. M1
<br>(byline Donna Niewiarowski)
<br>"Students Mad About Science" --
<br>In their informal speech words such as "hysteresis,"
<br>"micromanipulator" and "planetesimal" collide with "cool beans,"
<br>"Yesss!", and "all right, dude."
<br>
<br>In the St. Petersburg (FL) Times, Feb. 3, 1993, the personality files
<br>of the members of a local rock band used "cool beans" as a heading
<br>for the things or people that the members held in particular favor.
<br>
<br>Also the following from _Advertising Age_, Aug. 23, 1993, p. 5-6:
<br>Women 18 to 24 are apt to favor "cool beans," while teen boys say
<br>"dope" to convey the awesomeness of something. (byline Adrienne Ward
<br>Fawcett)
<br>
<br>Our own files have only one cite thus far, from _Rolling Stone_,
<br>Issue 680, Apr. 21, 1994, "Smashing Pumpkins," by Chris Mundy:
<br>"I just want some positive vibes," explains Iha [sic], who seems to be doing
<br>his part for the cause by substituting the phrase _cool beans_ for
<br>any and all affirmative answers (sample question:  "Hey, James, wanna
<br>get a cup of coffee?"  Answer:  "Cool beans"). [p. 46]
<br>
<br>An earlier date for the collocation is in Connie Eble's _Slang &
<br>Sociability_, in the "Select Glossary of Student Slang":
<br>_cool beans!_:  expression of approval, admiration {19]87.
<br>
<br>Ms. Eble, by the way, bashes Merriam-Webster's labeling of slang (p.
<br>23), comparing it unfavorably with the labeling in American Heritage and
<br>Random House dictionaries.  I am not going to attempt to outline or
<br>defend Merriam's slang labeling practices--for which in any event I
<br>am not responsible in toto or individually--but I sure don't agree
<br>with her statement that "the absence of a [slang] label implies that
<br>the word or phrase belongs to the general unremarkable vocabulary of
<br>English, whose use conveys no social implication."  Aren't there a
<br>variety of colloquial speech registers between full-blown slang and
<br>"general unremarkable vocabulary"?  Are _put down_ or _macho_ or
<br>_jock_ or _schlep_--which she calls out for their lack of labeling in
<br>the Tenth Collegiate, slang, or just informal, or in the case of
<br>_macho_, not even informal?  Just my opinion.
<br>
<br>Jim Rader
<br>