I inadvertently caused a great deal of amusement among a group of friends by incorrectly using the word "goose" to describe the action of sneaking up behind a person and poking, tickling, or touching them simultaneously on both sides (above the hips, below the rib cage) in order to startle them.
The intended usage (that is to say, "the only relevant meaning of this word inside my head") additionally implies that the target of this action would be person who would not find the behavior objectionable or inappropriate.
As it turns out, the way my comment was interpreted by everyone present was consistent with the only American English definition for "to goose" that is even remotely similar to what I intended. It is a slang definition that refers to surprise contact occurring somewhat lower and toward the back (specifically, on or between the buttocks, like the surprise nipping of a goose), and often with a negative or invasive connotation. British English appears to have a similarly negative and sexual – though perhaps less anatomically precise – slang definition.
Is there any genuinely plausible sense (or perhaps a regional vernacular, particularly in the United States) in which my usage was correct? As a native speaker, I'm confused about how I came to believe that this usage of the word had a different meaning than it apparently does, and if there's a sensible explanation of how I inferred its meaning incorrectly (such as, "well, that is what people mean when they say it in Central Kansas") then I am curious to know.
I did find in informal definition "to prod or urge to action or an emotional reaction" but this seems like it might be a stretch, and in any event this is overshadowed by the fact that it is not the sense of the word that was obvious to any of the hearers.
I am inclined (now) to think there may not be a sense in which my usage could reasonably construed as correct, and if that is indeed the case, then is there actually a word to specifically describe using this tactic of surprise touch to the sides, from behind, in order to startle someone, particularly in a non-sexual sense among friends?
Best Answer
Your sense is not a stretch, although a bit too precise in the "simultaneously on both sides (above the hips, below the rib cage)" element.
["goose, v.". OED Online. September 2015. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/80030 (accessed September 18, 2015).]
As you can see from the sequence of quotes and the meaning of the final one, if your sense was transmitted to you by someone, a grandparent for example, who learned the term before the end of WWII (during which the sense of 'to goose' was considerably vulgarized by soldiers), the sense you learned would correspond with what that person was likely to have encountered--aside from the precision I already pointed out.
Nonetheless, your use of the term with the sense you learned is now much more likely to evoke the more vulgar sense than what you intend, even imprecisely (a simple poke to startle)...although I, for one, depending on the context (and particularly the speaker or writer) understand it in the general sense "to poke, tickle, etc., in a sensitive part", rather than the more specific, vulgar sense commonly used.
If you're looking for a replacement phrase or term, what I've heard used is "a poke in the ribs", as in
This is the common contemporary phrase closest in meaning to your sense of 'a goose'. Obviously it moves the location you specified upward on the torso, omits the simultaneous duality of your poke, and doesn't accommodate concise verbal use.