tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post5127730163866623489..comments2024-03-16T00:21:43.240+00:00Comments on Separated by a Common Language: anti-Americanismism, part 1lynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comBlogger117125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-10618935943387403562020-08-23T13:46:08.981+01:002020-08-23T13:46:08.981+01:00BrE. Re train station. Over the last two weeks or ...BrE. Re train station. Over the last two weeks or so, I have heard several reporters use “train station” on the BBC news, including the morning news anchor Victoria Derbyshire. They were all discussing the train that came off the rails near Stonehaven in Scotland, so this is not to do with using a foreign idiom to cover a foreign story.<br /> On a slight tangent, for some years now “tv show” has been the BBC default for what used to be “tv programme” in BrE.Shy-replyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01891566073375322808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-20790157223125433542013-02-20T12:08:46.396+00:002013-02-20T12:08:46.396+00:00Have a look in a dictionary, Luke. It's also a...Have a look in a dictionary, Luke. It's also an adjective. (Not to mention a noun, a verb and an interjection.)<br /><br />It's not uncommon for words to have more than one part of speech. Other adjectives that are also adverbs include 'fast', 'better'/'best'/'worse'/'worst', and 'hard'. lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-12763125305657813982013-02-20T10:50:14.862+00:002013-02-20T10:50:14.862+00:00About the "I'm Good" / "I'm...About the "I'm Good" / "I'm Well" thing... Why on earth would you BE an ADVERB? Well is actually (prescriptively speaking) the incorrect word. You can't do that with any other adverb. "I'm quickly" "I'm undoubtedly" Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11155706718601471520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-30325614273451906282012-10-01T11:29:30.043+01:002012-10-01T11:29:30.043+01:00Stewart, no verb has been turned into a noun in an...Stewart, no verb has been turned into a noun in any of these examples--and some of your examples don't match the noun+ize pattern anyhow. <br /><br />It's a common myth among the British that Americans have somehow invented making verbs out of nouns. In the case of <i>hospitalize</i>, the first instances of it in the Oxford English Dictionary are British (London Chronicle, 1901 & 1904--though they spelt it with the -ise). <i>Alphabetize</i> goes back to the 17th century (London, again). <i>Authorize</i>, <i>humanize</i>, <i>magnetize</i> all go far back into British English. And it's the British, not the Americans, who stick an -ize in 'acclimatize'. <br /><br />We make verbs with -ize because (a) English is strongly influenced by French (and Latin) and (b) English has a very productive suffixing system. <br /><br />Why not enjoy the creativity of our language?<br /><br />And if you have something against 'gotten', I hope you have given up on 'forgotten', 'misbegotten' and 'ill-gotten' as well.lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-36816446023449887942012-10-01T11:15:11.649+01:002012-10-01T11:15:11.649+01:00The problem with 'hospitalize', 'burgl...The problem with 'hospitalize', 'burglarize' and 'alphabetize' is not the use of the -ize suffix. It is the transformation of the verb into a noun. It may very well be accepted usage in the States, and dare say there are usages in the UK that would look very odd and unwelcome in the States. However, since the debate is about Americanisms sneaking into British usage, then it is perfectly valid to object to these verb-nouns, just as it is perfectly valid to object to the resurrection of forms that have long disappeared from British English (such as gotten). We have perfectly good words of our own. Like instead of 'hospitalized', you could say 'admitted to hospital'; instead of 'burglarized', how about 'burgled', instead of 'alphabetized', how about 'put into alphabetical order' and, finally, instead of 'gotten', how about plain old 'has got'?Stewarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17419169487597131463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-21761356294389940522011-09-12T16:01:10.813+01:002011-09-12T16:01:10.813+01:00'6. To "wait on" instead of "wa...'6. To "wait on" instead of "wait for" when you're not a waiter - once read a friend's comment about being in a station waiting on a train. For him, the train had yet to arrive - I would have thought rather that it had got stuck at the station with the friend on board. T Balinski, Raglan, New Zealand'<br /><br />The use of "to wait on" in sense of "to wait for" is also derided in the U.S., although it's probably a lost battle. It is very common in Southern and Black English. Also, the King James Version of the Bible uses "to wait on" in this sense quite frequently, so it must be a holdover from an older form of English that was at some point widely accepted. Personally, I use "to wait on" much more frequently in spontaneous speech since it just rolls off my tongue; "to wait for" is what I'd used I'm trying to show that I care about how I sound.djweaverbeavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-70372364512749420472011-08-11T07:53:10.446+01:002011-08-11T07:53:10.446+01:00I delight in idioms, colloquial usage and wordplay...I delight in idioms, colloquial usage and wordplay. The BBC article, rather than enraging me with stabbity (a little netticism that I do believe will one day spread far and wide), made me chortle a good long time. Maybe even guffaw once or twice . . . or thrice. (Fragments are my friends, too.)<br /><br />Thanks for this response and the space for all the comments. It's been a joy to read.<br /><br />Re: It is What it Is<br />You know, that's never bothered me in the least. For some reason, I've always had it in my head that it was a somewhat profane play on <i>Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh</i>, perhaps by way of Popeye's "I yam what I yam." (Not to be confused with Descartes' gourmand brother's <i>Cogito ergo spud</i> - I think, therefore I yam.) No? It isn't? Too bad.<br /><br />The one thing that does drive me absolutely batty: use of "Anyways." Can you make people stop saying that? I would be much obliged.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-72693343280338642982011-08-10T17:53:43.228+01:002011-08-10T17:53:43.228+01:00British people are not 100% perfect in their dicti...British people are not 100% perfect in their diction. Some people affect a sloppy pronunciation. For example: one, two, free, four, five. Some people substitute a glottal stop for the letter t: mobili-y scoo-er.Jeanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01971930345251039386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-60388942408518224582011-07-31T06:38:22.611+01:002011-07-31T06:38:22.611+01:00It took me quite a while to get that last joke bec...It took me quite a while to get that last joke because in my accent it's pronounced 'counterFIT.'<br /><br />I didn't mean that abound isn't a verb (I know I said I did, but that wasn't what I was trying to say), I just meant that after I'd published it, I suddenly felt I migt have used it wrong and was trying to pre-empt the usual censure. Fail.<br /><br />Yes, a Pole is a Polish national and the metaphor refers to all the Polish bulders who migrated to the UK after Poland joined the EU and have subsequently become renowned for being much harder working and more effcient than their British and Australian counterparts.<br /><br />P.S. vp- I take umbrage at the implication of "<b>trying</b> to make a joke" ;)Solonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-14964729900293720442011-07-29T22:32:26.233+01:002011-07-29T22:32:26.233+01:00"How does the Queen get her salary?" rem...<i>"How does the Queen get her salary?</i>" reminded me of this:<br />Q. Why is the Queen's head on the coinage?<br />A. So that you can't counterfeit.Little Black Sambohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16699227938165106710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-64779019523923891982011-07-27T22:35:27.673+01:002011-07-27T22:35:27.673+01:00As an American approaching age 60 (at which point ...As an American approaching age 60 (at which point I will undoubtedly turn) I can assure you that I first encountered 'heads up' when playing baseball as a boy and it defintely meant, "Look up - a small, hard and fast-moving object is about to drop on you from above." And by extension it continues to mean any sort of warning. I've never encountered the alternative meaning of a face-to-face encounter between two people though I trust all the respondents who cited examples. BTW, in current business jargon, that sort of a meeting is universally abbreviated "1:1", short for 'one-on-one".<br /><br />And I believe Paul nailed it with his explanation of 'touch base' and its baseball origins. I've always assumed that is where the expression came from and so its extension to mean reconnecting with affected people before embarking on something new is perfectly logical.darcherdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-34106249471639177872011-07-27T19:11:10.344+01:002011-07-27T19:11:10.344+01:00I did not protest against the BBC publishing thing...I did not protest against the BBC publishing things I don't agree with. I protested against them taking a cheap route to publishing something to ensure great traffic, rather than publishing fact-checked journalism. It's tabloid publishing, and that's not what I'd expect of a public broadcaster that has informing and educating among(st) its central principles. The BBC chronically treats language as an opinion-based matter rather than involving researchers, as if it's not an important thing--but they cover language a lot, as if it is an important thing. <br /><br />Prejudices do exist. But let's examine the prejudice, rather than fuel(l)ing it for the sake of web traffic. Here, I am examining whether the prejudices are based in fact. The Language Log article I link to examines the more social/political aspect of the prejudices.lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-19634907673035762632011-07-27T18:54:16.382+01:002011-07-27T18:54:16.382+01:00I'm going to dissent from most of the views ex...I'm going to dissent from most of the views expressed here. I think this response to the original article is being unnecessarily thin-skinned and touchy. <br /><br />It might be wiser to take note of the fact that some people are getting offended. Even one thinks they aren't entitled to be, tact makes it both more prudent and more considerate not to tread on their toes.<br /><br />Nor do I think the argument has any sound basis that because one has paid ones licence fee, one is entitled to insist that the BBC only publishes things one agrees with. Even if one doesn't agree with people whose nerves jangle when they hear particular expressions, it's better to know that, than to insist on their views being censored out.<br /><br />The fact is, such prejudices do exist, and some British people do feel threatened by the incursion of the speech habits of people from a larger Anglophone speech area. One may say they shouldn't, but they do. It's better to be aware of this than to pretend it doesn't exist. By reacting so strongly to the original article one is being as touchy as those one is criticising, and in the very same way.Drunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-21195309762835016092011-07-27T16:43:18.481+01:002011-07-27T16:43:18.481+01:00Lynne
It's because you listed the 25. Even wi...Lynne<br /><br />It's because you listed the 25. Even with 24 comments missing that was a lengthy post. And you did — technically — publish.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-62674485762463297922011-07-27T16:29:23.638+01:002011-07-27T16:29:23.638+01:00@ Ø:
Google Ngrams, which I believe uses printed ...@ Ø:<br /><br />Google Ngrams, which I believe uses printed works, says that "try and" is twice as common in BrE as AmE. To be honest, I'm surprised the difference isn't greater.vphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16647609487352038948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-64710349273700900722011-07-27T16:25:17.052+01:002011-07-27T16:25:17.052+01:00Earlier today there were the first few lines of pa...Earlier today there were the first few lines of part 2, accidentally posted instead of saved. That people thought it was a post and started leaving comments on it amazed me, considering that I'd only commented on the first of the 25 items!lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-84012028340275593772011-07-27T16:09:14.187+01:002011-07-27T16:09:14.187+01:00John
Earlier today there existed a Part 2, includ...John<br /><br />Earlier today there existed a Part 2, including the quote of an uninformed peeve about the term 'Scotch-Irish'.<br /><br />Blogger tells me that the page does not now exist. I hope it's just being revised by Lynne.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-29976931158619058012011-07-27T15:03:21.363+01:002011-07-27T15:03:21.363+01:00Western Pennsylvania, like much of the South and w...Western Pennsylvania, like much of the South and what may be called the Old Frontier, was settled by the people called Ulster Scots in Ireland and the Scotch-Irish in the U.S. It's hardly surprising that the region is full of inherited Scotticisms.<br /><br />My wife and I like to read books to one another. Currently we're working on Robert Louis Stevenson's <i>Kidnapped</i>, written in 1886 but set in 1761. As I read it, I explain the Scotticisms, and occasionally a look of "Of course I know that" flashes across my wife's face as I realize too late that this particular Scotticism is also a Southernism: she's from North Carolina, though not herself Scotch-Irish.John Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452247999156925669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-73735127771707751792011-07-27T02:45:43.367+01:002011-07-27T02:45:43.367+01:00@Solo: I don't know whether AmE uses more comm...@Solo: I don't know whether AmE uses more commas than BrE. I often find myself hesitating about whether to put a comma in a given spot. But to use a comma to join two independent clauses is not just chewy, it's highly provocative. Except maybe in a sentence like the one I just wrote.Øhttp://http//voidplay.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-74452725421165529212011-07-27T02:39:45.052+01:002011-07-27T02:39:45.052+01:00"Try and" sounds incredibly BrE to me.
...<i>"Try and" sounds incredibly BrE to me.</i><br /><br />Not to me. It sounds like something you might encounter in spoken AmE, but not from all speakers.Øhttp://http//voidplay.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-52224153239663327842011-07-27T02:12:35.171+01:002011-07-27T02:12:35.171+01:00Katherine
Anyway, while the comments may bring ou...Katherine<br /><br /><i>Anyway, while the comments may bring out some anti-American feelings, I still don't think Brits (collectively) are any more against Americans than they are against other foreigners, maybe even less so, </i><br /><br />I think the vehemence of the 'peeves' argues against you, Katherine. When foreigners come out with unfamiliar English, we find it quaint. At worst, we may dismiss variants as childish or silly. That's certainly found in attitudes to forms from other dialects — nonstandard or in another of the 'home nations' of Britain and Ireland. <br /><br />But there's all too often a hint of hostility in the peeves — largely unconscious, I would say. We fool ourselves that we're <b>defending</b> the language. And only the Americans are seen as posing any threat.<br /><br />When I was a schoolboy, I used to frequent a specialist record shop, manned either by the owner or by the young woman who was his one assistant. One day she came out with something outrageous like <i>Oh I can't stand Americans!</i> I pointed out that all the people on the records were American. (Almost true. A minority of the wrists were British, Caribbean or West African, but performing in American or American-influenced musical styles.) <i>'Oh no!'</i> she said <i>I don't mean <b>those</b> Americans</i>.<br /><br />Much anti-Americanism in Britain is similarly selective. There are stereotypes that a significant number of Brits object to. From time to time we decide that some individual actually <i><b>is</b></i> like that — George W Bush being the most recent victim. Many people find it easy to combine hostility to Americans <b>as an idea</b> with easy tolerance — even affection — for Americans as living breathing human beings.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-55904456365380256452011-07-27T01:44:12.487+01:002011-07-27T01:44:12.487+01:00@Ø, Solo et al.
"Try and" sounds incred...@Ø, Solo et al.<br /><br />"Try and" sounds incredibly BrE to me. I would be very surprised to encounter it in AmE edited prose.<br /><br />(I'm a Brit exile in the US).<br /><br />@Solo:<br /><br /><i>But I find AmE far more comma-heavy than BrE, is that partly why my sentence struck you as overly chewy?</i><br /><br />Are you trying to make a joke with your use of a comma in that sentence? It feels extremely non-standard to these ears.vphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16647609487352038948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-32655033781300246202011-07-27T00:55:27.842+01:002011-07-27T00:55:27.842+01:00Richard, re the death of the BrE dialect; I wouldn...Richard, re the death of the BrE dialect; I wouldn't have thought this was a likely fear either, but it was the only alternative argument I could think of. But perhaps rather it is a fear of the death of their (the complainers) own way of speaking, on an individual level. <br /><br />Kevin's and Richard's comments also made me wonder if maybe the presence of new words and usages, whether from younger generations or different regional dialects mingling or something else, disturbs more traditional speakers, and, because of the widespread influence of Americanisms, they make assumptions and falsely attribute such words to Americans.<br /><br />Anyway, while the comments may bring out some anti-American feelings, I still don't think Brits (collectively) are any more against Americans than they are against other foreigners, maybe even less so, but it may seem that way because, as Richard pointed out, American language and customs are encountered so much more frequently than those of other countries.Katherinenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-4720018821982902742011-07-26T23:59:46.328+01:002011-07-26T23:59:46.328+01:00Solo, I think you were messing with us (feigning o...Solo, I think you were messing with us (feigning opinions that are not your own), and I was messing with you (trying to hoist you on petards that I was guessing you would see as your own). <br /><br />Of course <i>abound</i> is a verb, what else could it be?<br /><br />I don't get the Pole metaphor. Is this a Polish person?Øhttp://http//voidplay.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-62894744096151221042011-07-26T22:49:58.189+01:002011-07-26T22:49:58.189+01:00I'm not confident that abound works as a verb....I'm not confident that abound works as a verb. I just wanted to try.Solohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09740368155249391858noreply@blogger.com