Although it seems exaggerated, “miser” is a word that I consider part of the cultured language.
Ordinary people may understand it, but they don’t use it as they use, for example, “stingy” or the colloquialisms “elbow” or “stone.”
I remember my father saying “teco” to refer to the same thing, but I suspect that such a little word is out of use. Total cultisms would be “treacherous”, “tie up” or “rácano”, which people here do not use or understand.
I go back to “miser”; There are not few times that I have heard her as “greedy”, esdrújula and not serious.
I do not know why this peculiar rearrangement of the stressed syllable is due, which also happens with the word “beggar”, which in Mexico has several meanings.
For me, of course, it derives from “beggar”, a word less used than “beggar” or perhaps “beggar” (who when asking for charity invokes God, “for God’s sake”, “for the love of God”, hence “for + Diosero ”).
And with regard to “beggar”, in our country it lost its original meaning, “the one who gives alms”, on the contrary, the one who asks for it and sometimes receives it.
In Spain, for example, a magnate can still be a “beggar” today: “The duke was a great beggar.”
Now I go back to “beggar”; What does it mean? Depending on the context, it can be “stoked”, “cursed”, “naughty” or “meager”.
This word was widely used by the comedian Antonio Espino, Clavillazo, who in each of his dialogues brought it up with a long stretch of the “é”:
“I don’t bring a fifth mééééndigo,” he said with a lot of gestures and movement of his hands.
Now, two more possibilities for “stingy” are “grabbed” and “petty.”
Its meaning is more or less the same, but obviously the most used among the lagoons is “grabbed”, which clearly gives the idea of retention with the claws.
On the opposite side to the idea of stinginess is that of being generous, lavish, detached, splendid, munificent, liberal or wayward.
Except for “generous”, “detached” and perhaps “splendid”, the other possibilities are clear cultisms and have never been part of our speech, not even our writing.
I even think that the most common forms are not even so: the generous person is judged “good person” (the context helps to know in what sense), “good people”, “good compa”, since largesse is always an attribute meliorative, unlike stinginess that only summons terms with a pejorative air.
Back here was the adjective “manirroto”, almost nothing used. It seems to be the perfect antonym of “grabbed”, because someone who has a broken hand (in the strict or figurative sense) is unable to retain, to grasp, hence its inevitable detachment.
And well, throughout life you have to see everything.
Curiously, the ones that amaze me the most are the cases of extreme stinginess, not so much those of munificence.
Of course, for stinginess to reach its fullness, a certain availability of resources is necessary, since in poverty it is difficult to notice it.
A consummate stingy is quite a spectacle, and this is easy to see when the topic arises in the after-dinner table: the exploits of radical stingy are always a sure dynamo of the talk, as I was able to verify it in one that I started recently and later motivated this note.