tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post1257177614131322203..comments2024-03-16T00:21:43.240+00:00Comments on Separated by a Common Language: tidbits and titbitslynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comBlogger69125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-76024447862443672782020-05-25T05:30:46.809+01:002020-05-25T05:30:46.809+01:00Why would anyone say "tid" instead of &q...Why would anyone say "tid" instead of "tit"? You can never have enough tits.Jude Rawlinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06069965745397610091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-88244503938675708682018-06-22T18:47:28.324+01:002018-06-22T18:47:28.324+01:00I imagine Rossetti was unaware that breasts are pe...I imagine Rossetti was unaware that breasts are perfectly acceptable in a marketing context, but terribly embarrassing when used for nursing a baby. Victorian prudishness has since given way to Victoria's Secret prudishness.Squidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09453405013123482425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-26933368771853268512017-12-24T15:17:57.858+00:002017-12-24T15:17:57.858+00:00Thank you - I stand corrected, and illuminated! B...Thank you - I stand corrected, and illuminated! Best JamesJames Leenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-60807369254530185672017-12-24T14:52:18.963+00:002017-12-24T14:52:18.963+00:00Americans don't say 'in back of' in or...Americans don't say 'in back of' in order to avoid saying 'behind'. We say it because it's our opposite to 'in front of'. Its first citations are earlier than the first citations for the 'bottom' meaning of <i>behind</i>, which seems to have arisen in the UK. lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-66970153940374044372017-12-24T14:24:15.622+00:002017-12-24T14:24:15.622+00:00Your rich thread reminded me... I have American (N...Your rich thread reminded me... I have American (New England) cousins, who as children in the 1960s came over to the UK to visit our grandparents. I was always struck by the fact they religiously said 'in back of' to avoid saying 'behind' which was to me an unnecessary and tortured euphemism for the innocuous word 'bottom'. But for 'bottom' they would also say 'tush' which sounded rude to me, and 'fanny' which was to me the rudest word I knew, not yet having discovered the Anglo Saxon equivalent. Finally, (when 18) one female American cousin would say 'mammaries', to me a very weird (prim, pious) euphemism for 'breasts' or 'bosom' - at school, we boys used the word 'tits' for 'breasts'... and I'm finally nearly on theme! James James Leenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-47251731773665178162017-11-28T02:14:15.104+00:002017-11-28T02:14:15.104+00:00@biochemist
The Bowlseri{s|z}ation here was perfo...@biochemist<br /><br />The Bowlseri{s|z}ation here was performed by the very British composer Harold Darke. <br /><br />You can see Rosetti's beautiful poem as originally published in an American magazine -- complete with uncensored "breastful"s -- at its <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Bleak_Midwinter" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia page</a>.vphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16647609487352038948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-78072693118298521412016-11-05T16:03:05.933+00:002016-11-05T16:03:05.933+00:00You say 'laziness' I say 'natural phon...You say 'laziness' I say 'natural phonological process'. <br />The voiced 'flap' pronunciation of /t/ (not technically a 'd' but perceived as one) in AmE only happens between vowels, so it's not a factor here. If that weren't the case, then American 'batboy' would sound like 'badboy' (but it doesn't)--and many other -tb- examples...lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-67698584753168142772016-11-05T01:14:55.265+00:002016-11-05T01:14:55.265+00:00Back to the original word pair ... titbit/tidbit.
...Back to the original word pair ... titbit/tidbit.<br /><br />I'm not sure why it appears to be assumed that the original 'tydbit' was taken over before about 1700 but the altered 'titbit' didn't transfer in the larger migrations after this time.<br /><br />I am no linguist but think it as likely that the North American tendency to pronounce 't' within words as a 'd' has led the change. ('Botch' to 'bodge' would follow my amateur reasoning too.)<br /><br />To go on, and open myself to more flames, I'd also attribute it to, for want of a better description, laziness. It's easier to make a 'd' sound than a 't' sound.<br /><br />Not that laziness in speech is a particularly North American trait, much the same is happening here in the United Kingdom with, for example, 'Wembley' & 'England' when they are pronounced 'Wemberley' & 'Engerland'. The "bl" & "gl" sounds are harder to make than their newer forms.<br /><br />Right - I'll buzz off now and take my ignorant ramblings elsewhere.<br /><br />As you were.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-52553499788743359282013-08-05T14:00:05.049+01:002013-08-05T14:00:05.049+01:00Well, of course, this is the wrong place to discus...Well, of course, this is the wrong place to discuss this because we've already been through some of it at the 'toilet' post:<br /><br />http://separatedbyacommonlanguage.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/toilet.htmllynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-27263238536443538922013-08-05T10:46:22.154+01:002013-08-05T10:46:22.154+01:00Lynne, it's not the euphemism that sounds funn...Lynne, it's not the euphemism that sounds funny to non-American ears. (The first person I heard reacting with amusement to the use was an Australian.) It's the fact that the euphemism contains a reference to a <b>place</b>.<br /><br />It's like <i>It costs at least 20p to spend a penny</i> — except that this is <b>consciously</b> funny. <br /><br />Similarly with you other example, for which I'd substitute <i>about a dog</i>. It's the <b>excuse for going away</b> that counts. I can't imagine <i>Can you shut your eyes or go behind those trees while I go and see a man about a dog?</i>David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-28271357554559312852013-08-04T22:19:06.874+01:002013-08-04T22:19:06.874+01:00And yet I've seen Brits go to the toilet to &#...And yet I've seen Brits go to the toilet to 'spend a penny' or 'see a man about a horse'. There are euphemisms for bodily functions everywhere.lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-29688964937541017642013-08-04T21:23:18.792+01:002013-08-04T21:23:18.792+01:00What about "going to the bathroom"? I sa...What about "going to the bathroom"? I saw an American reality show (Judge Judy) in which a man faced the charge of public urination, but was actually accused off "going to the bathroom in the hall". What's wrong with that I thought. Turns out he had pissed in the corridor. No bathroom was involved, hence the charge, but even it it had been, the chances of there being a bath in it would be slim. No wonder they seem prudish to us Brits. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14125393324543559039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-51978337823610902522012-06-01T18:51:22.341+01:002012-06-01T18:51:22.341+01:00I'll try not to take that as an insult! :)I'll try not to take that as an insult! :)lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-43522532949286948582012-06-01T16:54:25.505+01:002012-06-01T16:54:25.505+01:00If you haven't read it, I really recommend Bil...If you haven't read it, I really recommend Bill Bryson's: Mother Tongue: The Story of the English Language. He deals with this subject brilliantly.Liz Tuckerhttp://www.businesswriting.org.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-49656584237799566942012-05-16T14:28:14.026+01:002012-05-16T14:28:14.026+01:00I seem to remember a process "cultural ossifi...I seem to remember a process "cultural ossification" (?) that occurs in colonies. I've always assumed that this is the original cause for such holdovers as tidbit, faucet and the propensity for AME speakers to use more archaic language constructions.<br /><br />Please don't disabuse me of this notion; I like to tease my American friends over their old-fashioned language usage. 8-)Roy Trubshawnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-51898906849118938542012-05-14T17:03:18.000+01:002012-05-14T17:03:18.000+01:00I still had Bronson's comment in my inbox, whi...I still had Bronson's comment in my inbox, which read as follows:<br />"Bronson O'Quinn has left a new comment on the post "tidbits and titbits":<br /><br />American's say "tit for tat" with no trouble.<br /><br />I mean, we'll giggle at "titbit", but only because it sounds so foreign that we think someone saying it is being intentionally dirty.<br /><br />Either way, I love learning these idiosyncrasies of different Englishes! "Mrs Redboots (Annabel Smyth)https://www.blogger.com/profile/11270027663691257254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-55302256021367457862012-05-13T22:33:40.078+01:002012-05-13T22:33:40.078+01:00And that was an excellent point. Sad that I've...And that was an excellent point. Sad that I've lost it!lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-46273689312213692292012-05-13T22:28:16.981+01:002012-05-13T22:28:16.981+01:00I can't reproduce the agreeable tone of Bronso...I can't reproduce the agreeable tone of Bronson\s posting, but I can remember the substance: that <i>tit for tat</i> is in American English neither remarkable nor sniggered-at.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-34374829953465473972012-05-13T21:05:11.974+01:002012-05-13T21:05:11.974+01:00My apologies to Bronson, but Blogger's comment...My apologies to Bronson, but Blogger's comment moderation workings have changed and I accidentally deleted it when trying to publish it (not realizing Blogger had started publishing things without asking me). I can't see any way to get it back. Very sorry!lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-58677166162559931002012-05-13T15:08:50.572+01:002012-05-13T15:08:50.572+01:00David
After the event, I looked in Google, which d...David<br />After the event, I looked in Google, which directed me to 'bodging' in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodging<br />- they give a much more succinct summary in their English Slang section. But I agree that it is easy to merge -tch and -dge words, or to run them in parallel, as here.biochemistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-39820438694685080782012-05-13T12:14:59.262+01:002012-05-13T12:14:59.262+01:00This comment [by Bronson O'Quinn] has been re...<i>This comment</i> [by Bronson O'Quinn] <i> has been removed by a blog administrator.</i><br /><br />This appeared to be a perfectly innocuous and thoughtful posting. The follow-up — which I can't read — may have been objectionable, given the non-de-plume of the poster. But could Bronson's post be reinstated?David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-80533741578004328922012-05-12T18:19:04.907+01:002012-05-12T18:19:04.907+01:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06400519158087088627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-54915596601192180872012-05-12T11:47:26.296+01:002012-05-12T11:47:26.296+01:00biochemist
'the plumber just bodged the leak...biochemist<br /><br /><i> 'the plumber just bodged the leak and hoped I wouldn't notice'</i><br /><br />If I heard that, I would <b>assume</b> (unless told otherwise) that it was a newly-coined blend of <i>botch</i> and <i>fudge</i>.<br /><br />Which brings to mind <i>fudge and mudge</i>. It never occurred to me before at a conscious level, but now I seriously wonder whether there's a ghost of a blend there — a subliminally communicated blend of <i>fudge</i> and <i>muddle</i>.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-6439256188225587912012-05-10T15:48:34.218+01:002012-05-10T15:48:34.218+01:00John and David - wildly away from the original top...John and David - wildly away from the original topic, I know, but on reflection I think I (BrE) tend to give separate meanings to bodge and botch.<br />To me, the former implies an attempt (dishonest)to cover up poor workmanship or lack of the correct materials, or perhaps a temporary repair intended to be properly mended later - 'the plumber just bodged the leak and hoped I wouldn't notice'.<br />Whereas a botched job is just poor workmanship or an accident that caused an imperfect result - 'the printer used the wrong ink and so the colour is wrong'.<br />It's an unfortunate reflection on the honest bodger, who 200 years ago would be found in the English woodlands making solid wood furniture with a pole lathe, adze and other primitive equipment!biochemistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-77300357596620185282012-05-07T01:45:44.183+01:002012-05-07T01:45:44.183+01:00Jill,
Another for your list (which has even come ...Jill,<br /><br />Another for your list (which has even come up in passing among these comments!): BrE snigger = AmE snicker.Richard Sabeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06707961497644079468noreply@blogger.com