/lit/ - Literature

>>12642067
I suppose 'She's a keeper' is used because keeper rhymes with keep her

A keep in the bit of the castle you live in. Comparing women to the size of a large house will not generally let you keep them.

>>12642067
She is one to keep, keeper. Just like he is one who sleeps, sleeper.
She is a keeper, just like she is a sleeper.

>>12642230
Wouldn't the man in question be the Keeper if we take the attitude that the woman is the Man's possession?

>>12642067

>>12642239
A more correct word would be kept-er, but that isn't a word. She is one to be kept, kept-er.

>>12642067
Shut up nerd

>>12642067
Ah, what a fool, to not be born into the glory that is the English Language, the most immaculate tongue of them all whose expressions and variants of speech are near limitless and something as simple as a grammatically nonsensical pairing of words that is, "she's a keeper", can convey such beauty and such a unique cadence about it, that those not initiated into this wonderful language are left in ponderance. What does it mean they say? English, a stumbling block to those who profess themselves to be wise but themselves, fools. Oh, how I pity them. Oh beloved english. My dear. So beautiful. So perfect. As to you my sad ESL friend, my only word of advice is to raise your children as English speakers, monolinguists so they can fully conceptualize and grow into the grandeur of this language of the angels.

>>12642251

>>12642067

She's a keeper, as in she is one to keep. She's a winner, she's one who wins, etc.

It's slang. It isn't formally correct.

>>12642284
yes, but she's object, not subject.

>>12642284
Those are different grammatical constructions though.
one to keep vs. one who wins are different because in the first you are the one doing the keeping. "She" is still the subject of the sentence, but she is one to be kept by YOU.
She's one who wins she is the one who is winning. the agency belongs to her.
These would be represented in different participial forms in Latin and Greek.

>>12642067
In fishing, in the USA at least, there are often restrictions on how many fish you are allowed to catch per day from a certain body of water, imposed by ecological agencies and the government. People who take too many fish out of the water are subject to pretty massive fines.
So, when fishing, you tend to let go of a fish you caught who is small on the assumption that you will catch a bigger fish later. If you catch a fish you'd like to hold on to, you "keep" it. It's a "keeper," a "great catch."
Same with traditional dating to marry, you want to let someone go if you think you can get a better one but if you believe you've caught the biggest fish you're capable of catching you want to hold onto it.

>>12642270
Based and crimsonpilled

>>12642469
You are absolutely right that there is an etymological incongruity. I am almost certain that this is the reason, though. If you peruse the vernacular then you will find many such incongruities. Shheeeiiit - how about correct/incorrect versus flammable/inflammable?