‘Yeah, Nah’ has just been promoted to OED status, which ought to impress most Aussies and Kiwis who are the main linguists in this specialist field of bogan-ese. Not intending to narrow its meaning, my understanding is that it is first an acknowledgement of someone’s behaviour or idea, followed by an expression of disapproval and dissent. ‘Yeah, I can see what you what to do, but Nah, it’s not gonna happen on my watch, sunshine!’

My hunch is that this colourful combination of grammatical interjections has been round for yonks, since something similar appears in Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians. Paul was offended that anyone would think him fickle in his decision-making: “When I planned this [ie some travel arrangements], did I do it lightly? Or do I make my plans in a worldly manner so that in the same breath I say, “Yes, yes” and “No, no”?” The question was deliberately rhetorical, and Paul expected a firm ‘Nah’ in reply.

Never missing a gospel opportunity, he then extended the point to remind the church that God never changes his mind when he promises something. And especially when he promised to send a Redeemer to this world on a mission of seek sinners and destroy sin. It would not be stop-start. Nor three steps forward, two steps back. Nor on-again, off-again. Nor yeah-nah. But yes. Absolutely. Totally, Definitely. Without question. So that we can make the confident reply: “Amen. Thank you Lord. Count me in. Bring it on!”