Who thought of the word blah?
82102
1. blah\n\nFunction: noun\nEtymology: imitative\n1 also blah-blah /-"blä/ : silly or pretentious chatter or nonsense\n2 plural [perh. influenced in meaning by blasé] : a feeling of boredom, lethargy, or general dissatisfaction\n\n2. blah\nFunction: adjective\n: lacking interest : MEDIOCRE <a blah winter day>\n\n"It has been suggested that the word originates from the Spanish verb hablar, which means "to talk". When hablar is conjugated to the imperfect tense, it becomes hablaba, hablabas, hablabamos, hablabais, and hablaban."\n\n\nGood question, one can imagine that it is from Spanish or was just an imitation of people talking as suggested in Webster. It is going to be very hard to track down the first documented use.\n\nThe oldest result on Book Search is from 1902! but there are probably not many books scanned yet.\nSurprisingly the same book has also "Yadda, yadda, yadda"\n\nThe Loneliest Muse\nby Tyger B Dacosta - Fiction - 1902 - 160 pages\nPage 82 - Yadda, yadda, yadda, blah, blah, blah, so what're you saying, we would have been\nbetter off if we just let your brothers and sisters eat us he said. ...
332951
jad·ed adj.\n\n1. Worn out; wearied: My father's words had left me jaded and depressed.\n2. Dulled by surfeit; sated: the sickeningly sweet life of the amoral, jaded, bored upper classes.\n3. Cynically or pretentiously callous.
292899
The answer would be "bore"\n\nhttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bore
1003076
They mean "I want to sound thoughtful and introspective but I have no creative ideas to write about"
313231
gees, just use a dictionary! you're so lazy!
1046271
NO..lazy is more like it. All speaking correctly requires is energy and desire.
1103845
Not a lot,,,, the ones that think they do,,, don't,,, the ones that do,,\ndon't know what their talking about,,,, everything and anything are so nothing,,, I knew something once,,, but I forgot about it,,,, because everything I knew was all about nothing,,,,,\nhopes this helps
455024
It was Charles.K.Ogden with his 'Business, Administrative, Scientific, Instructional and Commercial' (BASIC) english word list.\nCheck out the link below ;-)
1045263
gee george, dunno!! \n\n(that dumb enough for ya?)
912459
Quotes are said not written.\nThe question should be "Who said......" NOT   "Who Wrote"
573047
Just say, "In the immortal words of [ARTIST'S NAME HERE], 'Blah blah blah blah'" (where "Blah blah blah" is the lyric you wish to quote).
652838
Ennui (meaning boredom).
806779
He's a big headed bugger\nWho?\nHumpty dumpty\n\n\nDo u know what I can't understand\nWhat?\nChinese writing.
117395
The premise behind the plain English movement is that legal documents ought to be plainer--and more comprehensible--to the average person.  It's probably fair to say that the modern movement began in the 1970s.  But people have objected to the obscurity of lawyer's language for many centuries.\n\n    The first major struggle in England was to get legal texts into English, the language of the people, rather than French or Latin.  The problem largely arose when William, Duke of Normandy, defeated the Anglo-Saxon king Harold at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and became king of England.  William and his followers spoke a type of French.  And their legal documents were mainly in Latin, and later also in French.   English, in contrast, was the lower-class language of a subjugated people.  \n  \n    The vast majority of the English people had always been English speakers.  Nor surprisingly, by 1422, the new king, Henry VI, was a native English speaker.  Yet French did not die out among English lawyers.  Au contraire, it thrived.  Unhappiness about this state of affairs led to what might be considered the first plain English law: the Statute of Pleading, enacted in 1362.  The law, written in French, recited that French was much unknown in the realm; it therefore required that all pleas be "pleaded, shewed, defended, answered, debated, and judged in the English Tongue."   \n\n    An even sterner critic was Jeremy Bentham, who excoriated the language of lawyers as "excrementitious matter" and "literary garbage."   Bentham advocated codification, in which all of the law would be systematically divided into codes on various topics.  Individual parts of each code should be small enough for people to remember, and written clearly enough for citizens to know the "exact idea of the will of the legislator."   Bentham argued that plain legal language is essential to proper governance.  "Until, therefore, the nomenclature and language of law shall be improved, the great end of good government cannot be fully attained." \n\n    At about the same time, the newly independent American states were also engaged in trying to achieve the great end of good government.  Some of the founding fathers were well aware of the problems with legal language.  John Adams criticized English legal language and the "useless words" in the colonial charters.  He hoped that "common sense in common language" would become fashionable.   Likewise, Thomas Jefferson lambasted the traditional style of statutes, \n\nwhich from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at certainty by saids and aforesaids, by ors and by ands, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to lawyers themselves. \n\nUnfortunately, the revolutionary fervor of the early Americans did not extend to overthrowing the language of the law.  They ultimately imitated the ponderous style of his Majesty's statutes, if not their substance.\n\n    A modern plain English movement did not really arise until the 1970s.  David Mellinkoff's book, The Language of the Law, pointed out the many absurdities of traditional legalese.   On a more practical level, Richard Wydick's Plain English for Lawyers has been widely used to teach law students the art of legal writing.   In fact, plain English principles have been incorporated into the writing curriculum of most law schools. \n\n    The crusade to make legal language less convoluted and more accessible to average citizens has also resonated outside the academy.   In the United States, some of the earliest efforts to improve legal language directed at consumers were initiated by the Federal government, beginning rather modestly in the 1940s.  In 1978 President Carter signed an executive order that required
1183314
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
921729
ohhh yea!   snarky...\n\nI believe it sounded something like...\n\n"I really appreciate your opinion, BUT... clearly you haven't read the bible."
82546
just say it back\nor\n"nothin"\nor \n"just chillin"