I can't figure it out. I've seen both been used, but a nugget is presumably gold, or can golden be used as well?
Asked
Active
Viewed 4,700 times
2
-
1From Google Books: goose that laid the golden egg:208000 hits, goose that laid the gold egg:21. But gold engagement ring:1370 hits, golden engagement ring:48. – FumbleFingers Jun 27 '14 at 16:06
-
1An egg will hatch somewhere in the future, hence it contains a fetus, i.e. it's not entirely gold. Is that why the goose laid the "golden" egg, rather than the "gold" egg? – user76935 Jun 28 '14 at 12:25
-
are gold/en and wood/en like mystic/al, classic/al, magic/al, comic/al? – BCLC Sep 07 '21 at 13:07
1 Answers
3
Both meanings overlap, but not perfectly.
"Golden nugget" is ambiguous. It isn't clear if you mean that the nugget is made of gold, or if the nugget is golden in color.
"Gold nugget" indicates that the nugget is made of gold.
indigochild
- 260
- 1
- 9
-
2It's nowhere near that clear-cut. Countless millions of kids get a gold star for good quality schoolwork, but practically none of them would actually be made of gold. – FumbleFingers Jun 27 '14 at 16:09
-
2@FumbleFingers - It's not clear-cut for the word gold(en) in general, but it's pretty clear-cut when nugget is added. A golden nugget could turn out to be pyrite. A gold nugget is, or should be, composed of gold. – phenry Jun 27 '14 at 16:18
-
To the extent that legal society informs language, in the US (and maybe other countries) there are regulations about the use of the term gold when applied to metals. That doesn't mean common parlance will follow those rules. – bib Jun 27 '14 at 16:32
-
@phenry: I think it would be more reasonable to classify gold nugget as a "fixed phrase" (which we all expect to mean a nugget of gold). Given that the *precise opposite* occurs with the goose's golden egg referenced in my comment to the question, I don't see that one example as relevant to the general case. – FumbleFingers Jun 27 '14 at 16:48
-
@bib: Are you seriously suggesting the US has legal definitions about what can and can't be described as a *gold ring*? That seem unlikely (and totally unenforceable) to me. – FumbleFingers Jun 27 '14 at 16:50
-
@FumbleFingers By and large (a nautical term having nothing to do with jewelry), yes. See this regulation. This is directed to commercial practice. The GPs (Gold Police) rarely break in on intimate moments when a swain is exaggerating the purity of the proffered token of affection. – bib Jun 27 '14 at 17:08
-
1@FumbleFingers And there is rarely an investigation to see if the Fifth Day of Christmas is being fraudulently caroled. – bib Jun 27 '14 at 17:09
-
@bib: I don't know for sure, but it seems to me because pure gold is so soft, there aren't actually many things made of it apart from Krugerands. I think in practice that legislation doesn't directly legislate about the actual use of the word. It's just a question of whether or not in context a customer might reasonably claim to have been "misled". – FumbleFingers Jun 27 '14 at 17:25
-
...As to the GP busting in on a deceitful swain trying to palm off a mere 18-carat ring as "gold", I'm put in mind of Ben (Seth Rogen) in Knocked Up offering an empty box (to be filled with a gold ring when he can afford it). – FumbleFingers Jun 27 '14 at 17:26
-
-