Also:

If what is being omitted is indeed the "I", then why was it ever dropped? Can you think of other expressions where the "I" is omitted? The omission makes sense if the statement is a request, as in: "Don't mind me."

Suppose I'm invited to a party where the host comes around to me with a box of fancy chocolates. She says, "Here, take as many as you want." And I say, "Don't mind if I do." In this scenario, it does not make much sense to state that I do not mind if I have chocolates. (Why should I mind?) What would make more sense is to ask: "Are you sure you don't mind if I took a lot of them?" So, I feel that what is implied in the expression is actually a question of whether the person who is offering something minds my action or not. Or, it could be a request, as in: "Please don't feel bothered if I took a lot of chocolates."

"Don't mind if I do," is considered a polite way of saying yes when someone offers something to you, but I personally find it rude if the implication is in fact, "I don't mind if I do." "I don't mind..." means that I would not be bothered by it. So, if someone asks me to do something I might not want to do, the polite way to say yes is to say, "I don't mind..." For instance, at a party, the host asks me, "We need to get more beer, but I can't leave. Would you mind running out to get a six pack?" To that, I might reply, "I don't mind if I do." But when someone is trying to do something nice to me, why would I imply that I might potentially be bothered by it? It's like playing hard-to-get. Instead of saying, "I would love it," I'm saying, "I would not be bothered by it." It is rude to imply that someone might actually be bothered by the offering of chocolates.

"I" would make sense if the intention is to be sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek, but in that sense, it's not polite either. In other words, it is equivalent to saying, "These chocolates look disgusting. I'll help you get rid of them." However, in most situations where this expression is used, sarcasm seems inappropriate. This is why I feel that "You don't mind if I do?" or "Please don't mind if I do." seems more appropriate.

In any case, I wonder where the expression originated.

This is quite interesting. “Troop” certainly sounds less personal than “soldier”, because no one says, “I’m a troop.” Saying, “We are sending 10,000 troops,” sounds less serious, because it sounds as if we are just sending guns or something. It is possible that they changed the usage for this psychological/emotional reason, like the way they refuse to use the term “civil war” to describe what is going on in Iraq.

Hi AO,

I think we need to distinguish "curse" or "swear" words from words that are inherently offensive (derogatory words). As I said in my original post, there is a good reason why "bitch" is offensive; it's because the speaker is equating a woman with a dog. This is different from so called "curse" or "swear" words. "Ass", "fuck", and "shit", for instance, have no good reason other than the fact that they are categorized as "curse words". It is absolute, and they are banned regardless of the context. (As a matter of fact, Google might flag this very page as offensive, and the Google Ads might stop working.)

I agree that there are inherently offensive words (derogatory words) in any language including Japanese, but that is not what I'm talking about. I'm specifically talking about curse words; words that are banned absolutely, regardless of context, where the reason for the ban is circular. They are banned because they are classified as bad, and they are classified as bad because they are banned. I cannot think of any equivalents in Japanese.

By the way, the only "fugu" I know is blowfish.

“It’s raining now.”
In English, there is no way to tell what kind of person is saying this. In Japanese, there are many ways to say this:

1. Ima, ame ga futteiru.
(sounds official, dry, and descriptive)

2. Ima, ame futtendayo.
(male-sounding. Between friends. Same age or younger.)

3. Ima, ame ga futteimasu.
(polite sounding. Perhaps talking to older person.)

4. Ima, ame futterune.
(female-sounding. Between friends. Same age or younger.)

5. Ima, ame futteimasuwa.
(sounds old.)

6. Ima, ame futterube.
(sounds rural.)

If a kid (a boy) were to say #2 to an adult (especially a stranger), his parents would most likely scold the kid. It would come across as rude or inappropriate.

“Shit” in Japanese is “kuso”, which is actually interesting since both are used in similar situations, like when you make mistakes or when something bad happens. I’m not sure why in both cultures, when something bad happens, we think of a piece of fecal matter.

In any case, parents do not forbid children from using “kuso”, the word itself. The focus is not on the word itself, but on the context in which it is used. Most things are relative in Japanese culture, not absolute.

In Japanese, it is not the use of specific words that determines what is offensive. It’s all about the context. The words that are considered benign, friendly, or positive when speaking to someone younger, might actually be interpreted as offensive when speaking to someone older. The words themselves do not determine the degree of offensiveness.

In English, it’s the opposite. In many situations, as long as you do not use any of the officially offensive words, you can get away with saying anything. In this way, by officially banning words, we become less sensitive to the context.

Hi John,

As I said, there are taboo words in Japanese, but they are not defined so officially as in English. What exists is a degree of offensiveness.

Perhaps this way of putting it might help explain this:

Do all cultures have the practice of "bleeping" out curse words on TV? As far as I know, I've never heard bleeping in the Japanese media. In order for this practice of bleeping to exist, the bleeped words must be commonly used yet officially suppressed. If people do not know what those words are, and if they are rarely used, the need for bleeping would rarely come up. In English, adults are constantly self-bleeping certain words in front of kids. Some adults find this to be very difficult; they often slip, and have to apologize to the parents. Such situation would never come up in Japanese.

One of the most strongly suppressed curse words in English is "fuck", and because of it, it is one of the most powerful words. I cannot think of a word as powerful as "fuck" in Japanese. There is no equivalent because there is no practice of suppressing words so strictly.

Technically speaking, it is true that all languages contain taboo words, but for all intents and purposes, the Japanese language does not. I left Japan when I was 16, so I double-checked with my father. When I asked him if there were any curse words in Japanese, he said yes, but he could not name one. (He said that I would probably find them if I searched on the Internet.). I can’t recall any either. I remember reading some article about words that you are not supposed to use on TV in Japan, but I didn’t know any of them.

This becomes a matter of semantics about what “curse words” or “taboo words” are, but if the vast majority of the people do not even know what those words are, the nature and the function of those words are not the same as what we call “curse words” in English.

“Taboo words” and “curse words” gain their power by the fact that their usage is suppressed. This suppression creates tension, and when the tension is released, it becomes powerful. There are no specific words that are suppressed officially in Japan. Schoolteachers may criticize students for saying certain things in certain ways in certain circumstances, but these are all contextual. They do not latch onto specific words. In other words, they see that the meaning of a word is in its use, not in dictionaries. That is, any word can be a curse word depending on the use and the context.

Because I see the contrast between Japanese and English, I’m opposed to the official banning of curse words or taboo words. Like blowing oxygen into flames, by opposing those words, we give more power to them. In other words, the act of banning is in essence the same as endorsing them. Both empower curse words.

I agree with you Dave, but my question is this: If the meaning of "ass" is indeed arbitrary, then does it make sense to officially prohibit children from using it? It is "official" in a sense that I would get in trouble if I allowed my daughter to use "ass" and "shit" in school. In certain schools, she would probably be expelled. But for what reason? Just arbitrary reason?

If what JP is saying is true, it would mean that the categorization of "ass" as a dirty word is itself a dirty thing. That is, it's a form of prejudice or bigotry. By prohibiting the use of these words, you would be encouraging and endorsing this prejudice. Many words like "Black" or "Oriental" officially became offensive words for etymological reasons. Why couldn't the opposite happen? We look at the etymology of words classified as curse or dirty words, and if the basis for the classification is unjust, we unclassify them, and make people feel guilty for NOT using them. Just as we make people feel guilty for using the words like "Black" or "Oriental".

Webster says that they are essentially the same. (The definition of “homey” points to the entry for “homely”) I would guess that “homey” is actually a shortened version of “homely”, as our tongues got lazier.