Nothing bloody! NOTHING!
I want to punch these people in the face.
@2, I know. It is a virus and I am now a carrier. I want to punch myself in the face.
Reminds me of James Joyce's prose. Like!

Although, I have to say, the girls' phrase about a mouth fucking a hamburger nosebloody really steers into the nonsensical.
Mouths can't fuck and hamburgers don't have noses.
In the turn of phrase "fuck you silly" is silly operating as an adverb? No. It isn't describing sex marked by whimsy and clown makeup. It is describing the state into which someone is going to be transformed via fucking. It is an adjective. Now "nosebloodily"...
um wait "nosebloody" isn't an adverb in this sense, since it's being used to modify "you," which is a noun (ie she will be nosebloody, after they fuck.) In order to be an adverb is would have to modify "fuck," which is acting as a verb in this sentence
I love the sentence "My mouth wants to fuck a hamburger nosebloody." That is literary gold right there. I think Paul needs to weigh in on this.

Also, is it being used as an adverb or an adjective? I guess the question is, is "nosebloody" modifying "fuck" or "you"? I sort of read it as the latter (we will fuck such that you are rendered nosebloody [i.e. your nose is rendered bloody]). I'm not sure how "nosebloody" could modify "fuck," and I don't think I want to think about it any more than I already have.
All I want to know is I want to meet this lady.
Some couples are into private-weird-languageplay. It stands to reason some would add an exhibitionistic overlay. I will now punch myself in the face for giving this any thought.
Oh, 5 and 6 beat me to it. Adjective police unite!
@5 & 6 Right On! (and completely correct)

SLOG is the new watchdog of grammatical and syntactical purity!
I agree with @6 & @7; it would be an adjective, in this case. Now, if he had said "I want to fuck you nosebloodily", indicating that he was fucking her while his nose was bleeding, then I would call it an adverb, as it would be describing the state of the fuck.
Yeah, where's the poll option for "That's not an adverb"?

Clearly that option is winning.
I'm gonna answer this poll nosebloody.
Was the guy Andrew W.K.? This would make more sense if it was.
@6, I assumed it was modifying "fuck," not "you" because it's specifying the type of fucking going on (nosebloody fucking). Because, as others have pointed out, you can't make a hamburger or other nouns without noses have a nosebleed.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I was overthinking it. Too much of my goddamn day has been fucked nosebloody while contemplating this.
I agree that it is not being used as an adverb.
Oooh! Oooh! I've got this one! These people are fans of Japanese animation, in which nosebleeds are an indication of extreme arousal or excitement.

Looky here:…
All I know is nurses are FREAKS in the sack.
The only person qualified to answer this question is the Ear Nose and Throat Hooker.
IMPORTANT UPDATE: Our head grammar queen, Gillian, says I'm right about nosebloody being an adverb:

"It is an adverb if it is how you are fucking it (I'm fucking it nosebloody); it is an adjective if you mean how the [noun] is now (e.g. the now-nosebloody hamburger)."

That's why we're paid the big bucks, folks.
So, um, how tight were their pants? This is a detail that I think would shed some additional perspective on the subject.

No? Okay, perhaps I'm just a little on the randy side this afternoon.
All due respect to Gillian, I still say adjective. If you said "I want to knock you unconscious," is "unconscious" not an adjective? Replace "knock" with "fuck" and "unconscious" with "nosebloody," and I think it's pretty much analogous.

Knock : Unconscious :: Fuck : Nosebloody

Nosebloody = adjective

And yes, I think @18 is probably right. I saw one of said anime recently and was very confused by a lovestruck young man's nose exploding in red due to his stress/embarrassment until my 16-year-old niece explained that this was a "thing" in the anime world.
@3, Punch yourself nosebloody?!?!?!!!!
@21 - Hi Cienna. I'm still not convinced. Implied in this phrase is "until you are," as in, "I want to fuck you (until you are) nosebloody," which would make it an adjective.

It seems just like "I'm going to fuck you raw." It's not the fucking method that is raw - what would that even mean? Raw is describing the eventual state of the vagina and/or anus.

By the way, I'm going to send the paragraph above to the University of Chicago Press so they can include it in their next Manual of Style.
I assume that these hipsters just attended the movie "Take This Waltz" at the Crest, like I just did (and good lord, please, can I have 2 hours of my life back), which features two beautiful hipsters hurling love-sick insults at each other, similar to the nose-bloody nonsense cited here.
Missing a third possibility: it's a nickname. Or a proper name! Unlikely perhaps, but read Dickens for five minutes and then not so much.

Now I can't help hearing it in an affectionate Cockney accent.
"Nosebloody" here is an adjective. There are two simple tests to figure this out without resorting to drawing a syntax tree.

1) Substitute a known adjective form, i.e. sloppy (the adv being sloppily). "I want to fuck you sloppy" makes sense. So does "I want to fuck you sloppily," I should add. This particular syntactical slot can take either an adverb or an adjective, which makes it tricky. So how do we know which one "nosebleedy" is? Apply the movement test!

2) Move the word in question to a syntactic slot that ONLY accepts adverbs: to a position before the verb it is suspected to be modifying. "I want to nosebloody fuck you." Does that pass muster? Not in my book.

Adjective it is!

3) Bonus morphological proof: The root here is "blood." If you add the derivational morpheme (a morpheme which changes a word's part of speech or meaning) -y, the result is "bloody," an adjective. "-ily" results in the adverb. One can then assume, following the principle of common use, that in coining the new word "nosebloody," the speaker intended it to be an adjective, which the movement test above supports.

Thanks for playing!
Gah, I would have just let them sit together! I hate being the unwilling third party to exhibitionist crap like that.
i have gotten down and dirty to where my partner's nose started bleeding, sure.
Way back in 2002, when I was a senior in high school, one of my buds told me he wanted to bend a female classmate over a chair and fuck her til her nose bled. I have never heard lust better expressed. Sometime more recently, around 2010 or 2011, he finally got to bang her. I didn't ask if there was a chair and a nosebleed. Maybe in 10 years' time I'll ask.
Definitely an adjective, specifically a resultative predicate. But what troubles me is that the appropriate adjective already exists: bloody-nosed. "I wanna fuck you bloody-nosed" is much better.*

That said, there's no law saying you can't make up new words, it's just that this one doesn't seem to follow the usual pattern. If you want to make an adjective out of an adjective-noun pair, you don't put the noun first, but the adjective first, followed by the noun, and with an -ed ending. *pantswet, wet-pantsed; *dickflacid, flacid-dicked; *wallyellow, yellow-walled etc.

Then the question becomes, what is it in the coiner's internal grammar that allows him or her to form the anomalous Noun-Adjective version? Curious.

*Yes, it's ambiguous between a subject depictive (I wanna fuck you while my nose is bleeding), object depictive (I wanna fuck you while your nose is bleeding) and resultative (I wanna fuck you until your nose bleeds), but so is the original, insofar as it means anything at all.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.