logoalt Hacker News

stryantoday at 12:49 AM2 repliesview on HN

It's the usual English drift perhaps, but "bold faced lie" has been used since the 17th century, which is also apparent from "thirty seconds of Google searching". Three hundred years is enough usage for me to count it as correct.

On a side note, "bold faced" does not mean the persons face is bold, only that it is said boldly, which implies a level of rudeness that "bald-faced" or "bare-faced" does not.


Replies

harshrealitytoday at 11:40 AM

That it has been used does not imply it was used equivalently, or with the same acceptance.

You're probably referencing https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/137551/bald-face... — but see in particular the "Update" section of the top answer.

Modern references seem to align (for instance, Garner's): Bald-faced and bare-faced have slightly different connotation than bold-faced. Despite "bold-faced lie" being in somewhat common use, "bald-faced lie" is more common (over 2x according to google stats), and overwhelmingly agreed upon as the "literate" choice, unless an author intends to refer to the sort of lie that would headline an article.

Joel_Mckaytoday at 2:23 AM

Colloquialisms and slang have unstable meaning over history, location, and cultures.

Generally, something to be avoided by people striving for clearer communication. =3