British English vs American English
Poll
 | 5 votes (27.77%) | ||
| | 5 votes (27.77%) | ||
| | 8 votes (44.44%) |
18 members have voted
May 18th, 2011 at 3:21:48 AM
permalink
Verb conjugation in English
Usually when we conjugate a verb in English, we only say three parts
(1) 1st person present (2) simple past, (3) past participle (i.e. have ...)
Regular verbs are easy: like work, worked, worked because you say I work, I worked yesterday, and I have worked all day long.
The most famous irregular verb conjugation to Americans is stink, stank, stunk because it is part of the The Grinch song (at 1:45) ; the half century old cartoon that everyone in America has seen dozens of times.
Try conjugating these 9 verbs and note if you are American or British
awake
bid (farewell)
clothe
dive
dream
get
leap
learn
wake
Usually when we conjugate a verb in English, we only say three parts
(1) 1st person present (2) simple past, (3) past participle (i.e. have ...)
Regular verbs are easy: like work, worked, worked because you say I work, I worked yesterday, and I have worked all day long.
The most famous irregular verb conjugation to Americans is stink, stank, stunk because it is part of the The Grinch song (at 1:45) ; the half century old cartoon that everyone in America has seen dozens of times.
Try conjugating these 9 verbs and note if you are American or British
awake
bid (farewell)
clothe
dive
dream
get
leap
learn
wake
May 18th, 2011 at 8:43:12 AM
permalink
OK, here's my input, though a few of those words are not in my active vocabulary, so I might not be consistent in usage. I am American.
awake, awoke, awoken
bid, bade, bid (almost never use this one)
clothe, clothed, clothed (another rarity)
dive, dove, doven
dream, dreamt, dreamt (I may sometimes say "dreamed")
get, got, gotten
leap, leapt, leapt
learn, learned, learned
wake, woke, woken
Does that prove how much I butcher the language?
awake, awoke, awoken
bid, bade, bid (almost never use this one)
clothe, clothed, clothed (another rarity)
dive, dove, doven
dream, dreamt, dreamt (I may sometimes say "dreamed")
get, got, gotten
leap, leapt, leapt
learn, learned, learned
wake, woke, woken
Does that prove how much I butcher the language?
May 18th, 2011 at 11:04:11 PM
permalink
I was hoping to get at least one Brit. I am curious if they still conjugate the way the textbooks say they do.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:50:22 AM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinI was hoping to get at least one Brit. I am curious if they still conjugate the way the textbooks say they do.
Ok, being a 'Brit', I'll take a stab :-
awake, awoke, awoken
bid, bade (or bid), bid
clothe, clothed, clothed
dive, dived, dived (dove less common)
dream, dreamt (dreamed used as well), dreamt
get, got, got
leap, leapt, leapt
learn, learnt, learnt
wake, woke, woken
May 20th, 2011 at 2:30:05 AM
permalink
OK, from our huge sampling of one American and one Brit we have five verbs conjugated identically (awake, bid, clothe, leap, and wake) despite the dictionary saying there is differences between the dialects.
get came out as expected in the past participle with the British saying "I have got" and the American saying "I have gotten"
learn came out as expected with British saying "I learnt", and "I have learnt" and the American saying "I learned" and "I have learned"
dream both British and American used "dreamt" for both past and past participle while noting that "dreamed" is a possibility. Each noted it as a possibility for different cases. Dictionary says "dreamt" or "dreamed" for either case is acceptable.
dive came out as expected with American saying "dove" for the past tense, and British saying "dived", but the British also acknowledge "dove" as a less common possibility for the participle. I think that "doven" is just incorrect.
According to the Oxford analysis of over a billion words in writing, the 5th most frequently used verb is to get. The British and American confidentially using their regional variations.
From this very limited sample of two people, as the verbs become more rare, there seems to be some commonality in conjugation developing.
Incidentally "to get" is from an Old Norse word and is very difficult to translate to Romance languages since English users use it for nearly everything. We get into a car; we get a book; we "get some"; and we "Get down from there!"; we get a good price; we get home late; and we get to meet interesting people.
get came out as expected in the past participle with the British saying "I have got" and the American saying "I have gotten"
learn came out as expected with British saying "I learnt", and "I have learnt" and the American saying "I learned" and "I have learned"
dream both British and American used "dreamt" for both past and past participle while noting that "dreamed" is a possibility. Each noted it as a possibility for different cases. Dictionary says "dreamt" or "dreamed" for either case is acceptable.
dive came out as expected with American saying "dove" for the past tense, and British saying "dived", but the British also acknowledge "dove" as a less common possibility for the participle. I think that "doven" is just incorrect.
According to the Oxford analysis of over a billion words in writing, the 5th most frequently used verb is to get. The British and American confidentially using their regional variations.
From this very limited sample of two people, as the verbs become more rare, there seems to be some commonality in conjugation developing.
Incidentally "to get" is from an Old Norse word and is very difficult to translate to Romance languages since English users use it for nearly everything. We get into a car; we get a book; we "get some"; and we "Get down from there!"; we get a good price; we get home late; and we get to meet interesting people.
May 20th, 2011 at 3:05:00 AM
permalink
paco, seriously. You remind me of a cross between those commercials about 'search overload' where someone will say something and their partner will spew forth a multitude of different topics about that something, mixed with the time that internet first came out and I would type in a word and see a ton of information detailing everything about it. No disrespect intended, rather I'm as amazed by you as I was about the internet. In other words, We:so’ Nya:wëh:no”. (I appreciate you)
Stay tuned for my upcoming thread "Is pacomartin the internet?" where I will attempt to find a topic that paco knows nothing about.
Stay tuned for my upcoming thread "Is pacomartin the internet?" where I will attempt to find a topic that paco knows nothing about.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
May 20th, 2011 at 7:02:30 AM
permalink
Quote: FaceStay tuned for my upcoming thread "Is pacomartin the internet?" where I will attempt to find a topic that paco knows nothing about.
I have huge gaps in my knowledge. It shouldn't be that hard.
But, I am fascinated by the "Two peoples separated by a common language" quote from GB Shaw about American and British English. But I read that traditional British English is basically under assault. "Received Pronunciation" in it's pure form is now only spoken by less than 2% of the population, and London is hatching a new language called "Multicultural London English".
I read that Canadian English is now spoken by only half the people in Canada. There is about 15% that speak French, and a lot of people who speak American English. Much of the rest of the people learned their English in some other country.
May 21st, 2011 at 5:47:05 AM
permalink
Quote: pacomartin... I think that "doven" is just incorrect.
Yep, I believe you are absolutely right about that. I don't know why I even typed that. My only excuse is that it likely has been many decades since I last used the past participle of "dive" in either oral or written conversation. I just slapped down an answer to a question that to that point had no volunteers, and I probably didn't think it through very well on that one.
Or maybe my lack of language skills was just showing through once again.
May 21st, 2011 at 12:12:14 PM
permalink
Quote: DocOr maybe my lack of language skills was just showing through once again.
Your being overcritical about your answers. The overwhelming number of people have no idea what participle or subjunctive mean. Most of the verbs that differ between AmE and BrE are not commonly used, with get/got being the primary exception to the rule.
With Spanish you have to know a minimum of 28 suffixes for every verb just for common conversation. There are more that are less seldom used. There are three basic types of verbs and thousands of irregular verbs. In English you have four basic suffixes:
for example:
1) simple present: talk & watch & hurry
2) 3rd person present: he talks & he watches & hurries (standard is add an "s", but we use "es" after certain sounds, and replace y with "ies" at times)
3) present participle: talking & watching & hurrying (this form is never irregular in English)
4) past and past participle: talked & watched & hurried (irregularities show up in these forms)
Studying Spanish makes you long for English, but then I discovered that in reality nearly ever common English verb is irregular. Without realizing it, in English we use a very complex word order and helper words to convey tenses, moods, and person.
========================
About 20 years ago, I remember the maintenance department putting up a sign above the stairway saying forth floor. At the time I thought it was pretty funny, as if you were only permitted to enter the hallway if you had some kind of revelation, as in go forth, young man.
Now if you look at a blog there is a blizzard of alternate spellings, and a massive misuse of tenses. I wonder if all these people are speaking English as a second language. Although I consider myself a poor writer, there are times when I read things that I can only make a wild guess as to the question.
May 21st, 2011 at 3:05:04 PM
permalink
H-dropping and adding the letter "h" to other words in dialects of British English is known to American English speakers. In the "My Fair Lady Clip" there is a well known scene (about a minute into the clip attached) where it is discussed in detail.
But there is a new feature of British English called "t-glottaling" which refers to the substitution of a glottal stop for a <t> sound between vowels or at the end of a word. It is a language feature that's age-specific, rather than characteristic of a particular accent and it can be heard among younger speakers the length and breadth of the UK. It's something that's a distinctively British innovation - it's not, for instance, a feature of any US accent.
It is one of many examples, that seems to indicate that British English and American English, in terms of pronunciation at least, are diverging rather than converging.
t-glottaling with Cardiff accent
t-glottaling another example near bottom of the page
Are older Brits aware of this new phenomena, or does it just get lost with all the variations of English that you here?
==========================
For a piece on the American politics of dialect watch the first 90 seconds of Fox reports on President Obama's NAACP speech.
Personally, I think that Laura Ingraham was way over the top with her comments. President Obama didn't assume an artificial dialect, but he simply emphasized some of his normal delivery methods that are typical of black speakers. I don't think it deserves to be called "pandering".
But there is a new feature of British English called "t-glottaling" which refers to the substitution of a glottal stop for a <t> sound between vowels or at the end of a word. It is a language feature that's age-specific, rather than characteristic of a particular accent and it can be heard among younger speakers the length and breadth of the UK. It's something that's a distinctively British innovation - it's not, for instance, a feature of any US accent.
It is one of many examples, that seems to indicate that British English and American English, in terms of pronunciation at least, are diverging rather than converging.
t-glottaling with Cardiff accent
t-glottaling another example near bottom of the page
Are older Brits aware of this new phenomena, or does it just get lost with all the variations of English that you here?
==========================
For a piece on the American politics of dialect watch the first 90 seconds of Fox reports on President Obama's NAACP speech.
Personally, I think that Laura Ingraham was way over the top with her comments. President Obama didn't assume an artificial dialect, but he simply emphasized some of his normal delivery methods that are typical of black speakers. I don't think it deserves to be called "pandering".
October 4th, 2011 at 10:45:52 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinVerb conjugation in English
Try conjugating these 9 verbs and note if you are American or British
awake
bid (farewell)
clothe
dive
dream
get
leap
learn
wake
awake, awoke, awoken
bid, bid, bid
clothe, clothed, clothed ... When does one use this verb? I think clad is also correct.
dive, dove, dove(n) ... Doven does exist tho it is an old form.
dream, dreamed or dreamt ... I've used both.
get, got, gotten
leap, leaped or lept
learn, learned, learned
wake, woke, woken ... same as awake.
I'm an American.
October 5th, 2011 at 12:24:34 AM
permalink
Quote: AnWulfawake, awoke, awoken
bid, bid, bid
clothe, clothed, clothed ... When does one use this verb? I think clad is also correct.
dive, dove, dove(n) ... Doven does exist tho it is an old form.
dream, dreamed or dreamt ... I've used both.
get, got, gotten
leap, leaped or lept
learn, learned, learned
wake, woke, woken ... same as awake.
I'm an American.
Once again nearly all American say "I have gotten" while the British say "I have got" . This word is very common is often the most noticed in ordinary speech.
Americans say "I have learned" with British saying "I learnt"
Both British and American used "dreamt" and "dreamed", but Americans go for "dreamed" first while British go for "dreamt"
The past tense of the verb dive is unusual. There is a tendency in English to lose odd spellings for past tense and replace them with regular declension (just add an -ed). This word goes against the normal trend. It had the regular past tense of dived which is still the British preference, but Americans more or less invented dove for the past tense. Another American invention is "snuck" for the past tense of "sneak". I think the British still prefer "sneaked".
I found another blogger who thinks "doven" is an archaic form, and even an MIT paper that discusses that some people use this form. They are patterning after worn, torn, sworn, born(e), broken, woken, spoken, stolen, frozen, woven, and chosen. But I can' t find it any dictionary that says this form ever existed in proper speech.
You are correct that the verb clothe is not used very commonly anymore. I probably shouldn't have put it on the list. We are much more likely to say that we are "getting dressed" or we are "putting on our clothing". Also the alternative form clad came into use in the 13th century. It is mostly used in literary terms like "iron-clad" .
October 5th, 2011 at 2:49:07 PM
permalink
I just posted on this on another forum ... must be my day for dive / dove / doven! lol
Wordbooks have become more descriptive than instructive and even then I have found them lacking in many ways. Oddly, M-W still has many old words and old forms that OED just doesn't have or doesn't bother with. Sometimes the etymology is incomplete or just wrong. M-W has "scrutiny" as first used in 1604 ... Eath-seen, wrong! The early form of scrutiny can be found in Anglo-Saxon (Old English).
The common mythos is that Americans made up dove as a past tense but the truth is much easier. If you notice in OED, it states that dove is mainly North American and Scottish ... there ya go!
Once again, the Scots have kept either an old verb (like dufan from which had a p.p. of dofen (OE didn't have the letter 'v' so here, f=v ... doven). From dufan we get dive, dove, doven and from the weak form dyfan we get dive, dived, dived. The strong form was intransitive, the weak was transitive (meaning to dip something), like: lie/lay, rise/raise, sit/set, fall/fell. In the UK the weak form survived, but with an intransitive meaning. Meanwhile, American and Scottish English keeps the strong form.
For me it's hard to say, "I had dove" without saying either "doved" or "doven" ... To say, "I had dove" requires, to me, an unnatural stop, it just begs for an ending. We know that doved is wrong so I use doven which, as you noted, fits the wove, woven pattern. I just read a paper this morning on how folks find their way to usage with strong verbs and it talked about whether it should be doven or diven.
So use dove and doven without angst!
If you want to have fun ... check out glide. It not only has a weak and a strong form, it has two strong forms! And they're all correct! It would be hard to go wrong with the past tense of glide! lol
Snuck is another post ...
Wordbooks have become more descriptive than instructive and even then I have found them lacking in many ways. Oddly, M-W still has many old words and old forms that OED just doesn't have or doesn't bother with. Sometimes the etymology is incomplete or just wrong. M-W has "scrutiny" as first used in 1604 ... Eath-seen, wrong! The early form of scrutiny can be found in Anglo-Saxon (Old English).
The common mythos is that Americans made up dove as a past tense but the truth is much easier. If you notice in OED, it states that dove is mainly North American and Scottish ... there ya go!
Once again, the Scots have kept either an old verb (like dufan from which had a p.p. of dofen (OE didn't have the letter 'v' so here, f=v ... doven). From dufan we get dive, dove, doven and from the weak form dyfan we get dive, dived, dived. The strong form was intransitive, the weak was transitive (meaning to dip something), like: lie/lay, rise/raise, sit/set, fall/fell. In the UK the weak form survived, but with an intransitive meaning. Meanwhile, American and Scottish English keeps the strong form.
For me it's hard to say, "I had dove" without saying either "doved" or "doven" ... To say, "I had dove" requires, to me, an unnatural stop, it just begs for an ending. We know that doved is wrong so I use doven which, as you noted, fits the wove, woven pattern. I just read a paper this morning on how folks find their way to usage with strong verbs and it talked about whether it should be doven or diven.
So use dove and doven without angst!
If you want to have fun ... check out glide. It not only has a weak and a strong form, it has two strong forms! And they're all correct! It would be hard to go wrong with the past tense of glide! lol
Snuck is another post ...
October 5th, 2011 at 4:08:42 PM
permalink
snuck and clumb
I'll put these two together because the same folks use both. Being from the South, snuck was common as was clumb ... maybe clumb wasn't as common but it was heard none the less. In school they told us that these were nothing more than mistaken forms used by the less "educated" rednecks and hillbillies.
Even tho I learned to write sneaked, I found myself still saying snuck. Nowadays, the [URL="says:
In the Oxford English Corpus there are now more US citations for snuck than there are for sneaked, and there is evidence of snuck gaining ground in British English also.
My, how far we've come! lol
However, many years later, upon learning a bit of Anglo-Saxon (Old English) I found that those "mistaken" forms, had an [URL="
In OE, we find climban with one of the simple past forms being þu (thu) clumbe and the p.p. of (ge)clumben. In ME, it's all over the place, to include clamb, clomb, clumb, asf.
For sneak, it's not so clear but still in the ballpark. In OE we have snīcan with a simple past of ic snāc. So it is a strong verb with a vowel stem change. The quality of how that ā is pronounced varies ... We get to ME, it is snike ... I can't find it conjugated so I don't know the various forms it might have had. The only thing that we can say it that sneak had stem changing past tense and that snuck was common across a whole section of the country ... It's just my guess, but somehow I bet some young grad student could chase it down the Scottish immigrants along with dove and clumb!
Anyway, I like strong verbs and will use them with strong ending and/or stem changes whenever I can. If some folks want to use the weak ending of -ed, go right ahead! I think English is bendable enuff for that!
BTW, sometimes it does work that a weak verb changes to take on a strong ending. Look at the Latinates plead and prove. You can say "pled" (and pleaded) and you can say "proven" for the p.p. of prove (as well as proved).
So, I"ve snuck onto the forum, clumb up on topic, pled my sake ... and maybe I've proven my point! lol ... Then I dove off ...
I'll put these two together because the same folks use both. Being from the South, snuck was common as was clumb ... maybe clumb wasn't as common but it was heard none the less. In school they told us that these were nothing more than mistaken forms used by the less "educated" rednecks and hillbillies.
Even tho I learned to write sneaked, I found myself still saying snuck. Nowadays, the [URL="says:
In the Oxford English Corpus there are now more US citations for snuck than there are for sneaked, and there is evidence of snuck gaining ground in British English also.
My, how far we've come! lol
However, many years later, upon learning a bit of Anglo-Saxon (Old English) I found that those "mistaken" forms, had an [URL="
In OE, we find climban with one of the simple past forms being þu (thu) clumbe and the p.p. of (ge)clumben. In ME, it's all over the place, to include clamb, clomb, clumb, asf.
For sneak, it's not so clear but still in the ballpark. In OE we have snīcan with a simple past of ic snāc. So it is a strong verb with a vowel stem change. The quality of how that ā is pronounced varies ... We get to ME, it is snike ... I can't find it conjugated so I don't know the various forms it might have had. The only thing that we can say it that sneak had stem changing past tense and that snuck was common across a whole section of the country ... It's just my guess, but somehow I bet some young grad student could chase it down the Scottish immigrants along with dove and clumb!
Anyway, I like strong verbs and will use them with strong ending and/or stem changes whenever I can. If some folks want to use the weak ending of -ed, go right ahead! I think English is bendable enuff for that!
BTW, sometimes it does work that a weak verb changes to take on a strong ending. Look at the Latinates plead and prove. You can say "pled" (and pleaded) and you can say "proven" for the p.p. of prove (as well as proved).
So, I"ve snuck onto the forum, clumb up on topic, pled my sake ... and maybe I've proven my point! lol ... Then I dove off ...
October 5th, 2011 at 4:52:50 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinFor example, I read that British read the first sentence, like the Americans read the second sentence. An American reads the second sentence that "he" is required to go to school by "them".
(1) “They insisted he went to school every day”
(2) “They insisted he go to school every day”
It gets even more interesting contrasting English with Spanish. In English, you drop something on the floor; in Spanish, it just falls. In English, you forget things; in Spanish, they just get forgotten. Much less accusatory.
October 5th, 2011 at 5:01:24 PM
permalink
Quote: AnWulfThe common mythos is that Americans made up dove as a past tense
[EDIT] I wrote this before I saw your last post.
Well I stand corrected. It must be a very common mythos, because I found it in papers like Lexical and morphological conditioning of paradigm gaps which was written at MIT. This paper says "doven" is a mistake because it as an attempt to make dove follow the paradigm.
Another example is the The American Heritage book of English usage which very specifically says that dive was never a Strong Declension verb in Old English, but was one of the small group of verbs that swam against the historical tide.
The historical tide is go from strong to weak. Examples include:
the past tense of help was once healp and now is helped;
the past tense of step was once stop and now is stepped.
Exceptions to the strong to weak (i.e. went from weak to strong) are:
the past tense of were was once werede and now is wore;
the past tense of spit was once spitede and now is spat.
the past tense of dive was once dived and now is dove although dived is still acceptable or even preferred in Britain.
October 5th, 2011 at 5:04:33 PM
permalink
I believe that one Canadian writer was enroute to some remote Newfoundland village to earn a diploma in French of the People which appears to be a rather different language than the French that is approved by scholars when she took shelter from the amorous attentions of a boatyard dog on Farley Mowat's boat.Quote: pacomartinThere is about 15% that speak French ...
I think you will also find that English language as defined in Indonesia is quite different than English as it might be spoken in the UK.
Lingua Franca has probably long ago been replaced by English although probably originally displaced by Pidgin English.
October 5th, 2011 at 5:04:56 PM
permalink
Quote: heatherIt gets even more interesting contrasting English with Spanish. In English, you drop something on the floor; in Spanish, it just falls. In English, you forget things; in Spanish, they just get forgotten. Much less accusatory.
That's a good point. I wonder if all the Romance languages share this trait?
IN my class in Oaxaca, we had a young girl from Oxford University that spoke fluent Welsh, French, Russian and English. Another guy was a French Canadian, one girl spoke Japanese, and another Chinese. So basically every time a question like this came up, someone could answer it.
October 6th, 2011 at 12:08:39 AM
permalink
I read the 2008 paper by Albright, I didn't get the impression that doven was a mistake rather than he was just exploring the way that folks got there. Indeed, I'm impressed that so many have found their way to doven since it isn't normally listed nor taught!
I warned you about wordbooks and their errors. M-W also says that dive was a "originally" a weak verb ... That's splittin' hairs. Since the spelling has changed to dive, that may be true but it's not true for past forms.
So if there is any doubt:
bedûfan^2 immerse, submerge, drown ['bedove'] (sic)
±dûfan^2 to duck, 'dive'
ðurhdûfan^2 to dive through
dýfan (= î) to dip, immerse.
* 1916, John R. Clark, "A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary for the Use of Students"
be-dúfan - p. -deáf, pl. -dufon; pp. -dofen To bedive, put under
be-dofen - drowned ; pp. of be-dúfan.
dúfan - ic dúfe, ðú dýfst, he dýfþ, pl. dúfaþ; p. ic, he deáf, ðú dufe, pl. dufon; pp. dofen To DIVE, sink
þurh-dúfan - to dive through
dýfan - p. de; pp. ed To dip, immerse (weak verb)
In ME we have bedoven for "drenched" or "drowned":
Alle hir body..semyd be dowen in blood (here w=v)- Life of Saint Christina Mirabilis of Saint Trudons [St.Christina Mirab.] (All her body seemed bedoven in blood.)
I warned you about wordbooks and their errors. M-W also says that dive was a "originally" a weak verb ... That's splittin' hairs. Since the spelling has changed to dive, that may be true but it's not true for past forms.
So if there is any doubt:
bedûfan^2 immerse, submerge, drown ['bedove'] (sic)
±dûfan^2 to duck, 'dive'
ðurhdûfan^2 to dive through
dýfan (= î) to dip, immerse.
* 1916, John R. Clark, "A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary for the Use of Students"
be-dúfan - p. -deáf, pl. -dufon; pp. -dofen To bedive, put under
be-dofen - drowned ; pp. of be-dúfan.
dúfan - ic dúfe, ðú dýfst, he dýfþ, pl. dúfaþ; p. ic, he deáf, ðú dufe, pl. dufon; pp. dofen To DIVE, sink
þurh-dúfan - to dive through
dýfan - p. de; pp. ed To dip, immerse (weak verb)
In ME we have bedoven for "drenched" or "drowned":
Alle hir body..semyd be dowen in blood (here w=v)- Life of Saint Christina Mirabilis of Saint Trudons [St.Christina Mirab.] (All her body seemed bedoven in blood.)
October 6th, 2011 at 12:21:12 AM
permalink
Quote: heather
It gets even more interesting contrasting English with Spanish. In English, you drop something on the floor; in Spanish, it just falls. In English, you forget things; in Spanish, they just get forgotten. Much less accusatory.
Dejé caer el libro. - I let the book drop (fall).
Ella dejó caer el libro. - She let the book drop.
El libro se cayó. - The book fell.
Me olvidé. - I forgot ... This uses a reflexive pronoun but it is still I. You'll see if you put the pronoun in ... Yo me olvidé.
Ella se olvidó. - She forgot
Se quedó en el olvido. - It was forgotten.
October 6th, 2011 at 1:00:49 AM
permalink
I saw a British phrase in a recent news article about the body of an American eccentric that was found on an island 100 yards from Buckingham Palace. He had been dead for up to 3 years.
A spokesman for The Royal Parks said: “This island is checked by Wildlife Officers three times a year, however work to prune trees and to inspect it closely is carried out every two years - it was during one of these inspections that the discovery was made. Going forward we are planning to carry out thorough inspections on a more regular basis.”
It seems very compact, instead of saying After today or From this time forward.
A spokesman for The Royal Parks said: “This island is checked by Wildlife Officers three times a year, however work to prune trees and to inspect it closely is carried out every two years - it was during one of these inspections that the discovery was made. Going forward we are planning to carry out thorough inspections on a more regular basis.”
It seems very compact, instead of saying After today or From this time forward.
October 6th, 2011 at 2:25:34 AM
permalink
Yes. I think "fag" in that connection means a first year student who is sent on errands by senior class men. Its like "the fag end of a rope"... no sexual reference at all.Quote: Docthe nickname for an underclassman is "fag", and I don't think it related to the derogatory sexual reference. I vaguely remembering that it was suggested this was a common, taunting nickname for a school underling.
English in Britain seems to be changing with a Gypsy word, Chav, now commonly used for young boy or young hooligan. Chav even seems to be spreading to the USA.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:53:22 AM
permalink
The spit/spat is another one where the history is uncloudy if one only puts a little elbow grease to it. There are sundry words for "to spit" in OE to enfold spittan, spætan, spatan, asf; but what it comes down to is dialectal usage:
OE spittan (Anglian), spætan (W.Saxon) ... both were weak verbs with past tenses of spitted(e) and spæted(e). Both have dropped the -ed and the 'æ' is now 'a'. ... Thus spit and spat. It's not a case of a weak verb going to a strong verb but the blending of two weak verbs.
This is why I get amused at most pedants and feel let down by many wordbooks like Am. Heritage or M-W or OED when they make simple mistakes ... like this one.
OE spittan (Anglian), spætan (W.Saxon) ... both were weak verbs with past tenses of spitted(e) and spæted(e). Both have dropped the -ed and the 'æ' is now 'a'. ... Thus spit and spat. It's not a case of a weak verb going to a strong verb but the blending of two weak verbs.
This is why I get amused at most pedants and feel let down by many wordbooks like Am. Heritage or M-W or OED when they make simple mistakes ... like this one.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:08:40 PM
permalink
Here's one for y'all ... Earlier this evening I saw a debate about "hone in" vs "home in".
Folks, I had never heard of "hone in" until I saw it on a forum earlier this evening. It's HOME IN not HONE ... You can hone your skills but you home in on a target.
home (v.) - 1765, "to go home" from home (n.). Meaning "be guided to a destination by radio signals, etc. (of missiles, aircraft, etc.) is from 1920; it had been used earlier in reference to pigeons (1862). Related: Homed; homing. OE had hamian "to establish in a home".
Folks, I had never heard of "hone in" until I saw it on a forum earlier this evening. It's HOME IN not HONE ... You can hone your skills but you home in on a target.
home (v.) - 1765, "to go home" from home (n.). Meaning "be guided to a destination by radio signals, etc. (of missiles, aircraft, etc.) is from 1920; it had been used earlier in reference to pigeons (1862). Related: Homed; homing. OE had hamian "to establish in a home".
October 7th, 2011 at 2:20:44 AM
permalink
Here's one for y'all ... Earlier this evening I saw a debate about "hone in" vs "home in".
Folks, I had never heard of "hone in" until I saw it on a forum earlier this evening. It's HOME IN not HONE ... You can hone your skills but you home in on a target.
home (v.) - 1765, "to go home" from home (n.). Meaning "be guided to a destination by radio signals, etc. (of missiles, aircraft, etc.) is from 1920; it had been used earlier in reference to pigeons (1862). Related: Homed; homing. OE had hamian "to establish in a home".
Folks, I had never heard of "hone in" until I saw it on a forum earlier this evening. It's HOME IN not HONE ... You can hone your skills but you home in on a target.
home (v.) - 1765, "to go home" from home (n.). Meaning "be guided to a destination by radio signals, etc. (of missiles, aircraft, etc.) is from 1920; it had been used earlier in reference to pigeons (1862). Related: Homed; homing. OE had hamian "to establish in a home".
October 7th, 2011 at 12:31:06 PM
permalink
Quote: AnWulfHere's one for y'all ... Earlier this evening I saw a debate about "hone in" vs "home in".
Folks, I had never heard of "hone in" until I saw it on a forum earlier this evening. It's HOME IN not HONE ... You can hone your skills but you home in on a target.
home (v.) - 1765, "to go home" from home (n.). Meaning "be guided to a destination by radio signals, etc. (of missiles, aircraft, etc.) is from 1920; it had been used earlier in reference to pigeons (1862). Related: Homed; homing. OE had hamian "to establish in a home".
Merriam Webster says it has been in use since 1965. It does note that many people, like yourself, consider it a mistake.
October 7th, 2011 at 7:25:31 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinMerriam Webster says it has been in use since 1965. It does note that many people, like yourself, consider it a mistake.
LOL ... Yes, it has been used wrongly since 1965 ... Let's see, for 100 years before that, it was "home in" ... somebody makes a mistake in 1965 with "hone in" and it is picked up. That doesn't make it any more correct.
I have a pilot's license and worked in aviation for many years ... you have homing beacons ... not honing.
I will say that there is a gray area but it's still wrong and you have to stretch the definition of hone. To hone is to sharpen ... from that you could, I suppose, stretch to "to focus" ... as in "hone your attention on the matter at hand". But you still wouldn't say "hone in". Note that you cannot use hone as a noun for focus ... you can't say, "The hone of the project." Maybe a few years from now you'll be able to, but for now, hone does not mean focus as a noun. So there isn't a full swap for focus. If you drop "your attention" then you've changed the hue of the framework ... Now "matter" be becomes the object ... the target ... and here you should switch to "home in". ... You wouldn't say, "sharpen in on the matter" so you shouldn't say "hone in on the matter". "Home in" or "zero in" works here.
Also from M-W for home as a verb:
4: to proceed or direct attention toward an objective <science is homing in on the mysterious human process — Samuel Glucksberg>
BTW ... pet peeve alert ... I don't have many pet peeves but the misuse, abuse of the reflexive pronouns is one. One should say, "It does note that many people, like you, consider it a mistake."
October 7th, 2011 at 9:38:49 PM
permalink
For what it's worth, I picked up one of the Gordon Ramsey biographies at the library and I couldn't finish it. I'm a foodie, I keep Food Network on all the time, and I enjoy Kitchen Nightmares, the F-Word and to a lesser extent, his ridiculously inept Hell's Kitchen, so I was interested. But that book was sooooooo British I couldn't stand it. Not just his constant references to soccer every page, or spelling of 'flavour', 'colour', and such, or uses of 'bloke', 'bollocks', but all the British cliches that I just didn't get. I can't think of them now, but at least twice per page there was a phrase, pun, or saying that made no sense to me. Like saying "he really got his tail over the fence on that one" or something that left me scratching my head wondering WTF he meant. I quit reading after a third of it.
"Poker sure is an easy game to beat if you have the roll to keep rebuying."
October 8th, 2011 at 12:09:44 AM
permalink
Quote: zippyboyFor what it's worth, I picked up one of the Gordon Ramsey biographies at the library and I couldn't finish it.
His biography says he was born and lived in Scotland to the age of 5. He moved to within 2 miles of Royal Shakespeare Company's theater in Stratford Upon Avon where he lived until he was 16. Then he moved to Banbury to play soccer at the age of 16. He is often described as speaking Estuary English with very little trace of his early Scottish accent.
You said biography but you didn't mention the author. Are you sure you didn't mean autobiography?
December 21st, 2011 at 5:03:20 AM
permalink
I was just getting used to dodgy, and now the word pongy shows up in an article about handbags made out of elephant dung. The bags are made in Delhi by women on low incomes, and are being sold for charity. Sting's wife said It sounds pongy, but it doesn't smell .
It seems to be some British version of the word "pungent". I've never heard of such a word.
It seems to be some British version of the word "pungent". I've never heard of such a word.
December 21st, 2011 at 9:24:26 AM
permalink
The Wiktionary entry for "pongy" was originally penned over 7 years ago so it can't be that recent a phenomenon.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
December 21st, 2011 at 10:01:23 AM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistThe Wiktionary entry for "pongy" was originally penned over 7 years ago so it can't be that recent a phenomenon.
It's not. It to me is a bit of a late 80's-early 90's word, or used by the upper classes instead of smelly. I don't think I've heard the word used in a long time. However, I could be losing touch slowly, as I don't get steeped in UK slang as much any more.
I still use dodgy all the time though :)
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
February 24th, 2012 at 5:04:11 PM
permalink
The Big Bang Theory joke about the subjunctive mood while Sheldon is playing the Bongo Drums (time 16:00-16:30).
Sheldon corrects Penny for improper use of the subjunctive (at 3 in the morning). It's the first time I've ever heard a joke on TV about grammatical mood.
I posted this on the English thread, but it's more of a problem in Spanish where the improper use of the subjunctive is a major issue. In English you can get away with it.
Sheldon corrects Penny for improper use of the subjunctive (at 3 in the morning). It's the first time I've ever heard a joke on TV about grammatical mood.
I posted this on the English thread, but it's more of a problem in Spanish where the improper use of the subjunctive is a major issue. In English you can get away with it.
February 24th, 2012 at 5:25:54 PM
permalink
IN the UK if something 'pongs' then it means it smells. As far as I know it's been around for ages - as far as I can remember anyway.
February 24th, 2012 at 5:48:01 PM
permalink
Quote: SwitchIN the UK if something 'pongs' then it means it smells. As far as I know it's been around for ages - as far as I can remember anyway.
They say if you went back 100 years in London, a modern
Englishman wouldn't be able to understand the slang
spoken in the streets, its changed so much from then to
now.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
July 2nd, 2012 at 8:24:12 AM
permalink
What the heck kind of accent is in this video? It's from a Russian television station, and it sounds sort of British, but almost like you were talking to a small child. The enunciation is perfect, but the cadence is almost lyrical.
July 2nd, 2012 at 8:49:34 AM
permalink
Doesn't sound like a native Brit to me, more like english as a second language. Possibly a Scandinavian as they can have that floopy, lyrical tone.
I'm a Brit who was raised in an east London family (think east Enders accents) who has moved out to the sticks. I now sound more 'countryfied' pronouncing bike as boike and like as loike. When I shout or get excited, the old London accent come back complete with dropped t's and h's. So 'get down here now' becomes 'git daaahn ere naah'
I'm a Brit who was raised in an east London family (think east Enders accents) who has moved out to the sticks. I now sound more 'countryfied' pronouncing bike as boike and like as loike. When I shout or get excited, the old London accent come back complete with dropped t's and h's. So 'get down here now' becomes 'git daaahn ere naah'
July 2nd, 2012 at 10:26:00 AM
permalink
Quote: Nikkid21Possibly a Scandinavian as they can have that floopy, lyrical tone.
That's the best adjective, "floopy". I can't tell from the news site as to the identity of the narrator.
But you have to admit, the photo of adopted tiger cubs sleeping with puppies is pretty priceless.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:30:15 AM
permalink
Quote: AnWulfQuote: pacomartinMerriam Webster says it has been in use since 1965. It does note that many people, like yourself, consider it a mistake.
LOL ... Yes, it has been used wrongly since 1965 ... Let's see, for 100 years before that, it was "home in" ... somebody makes a mistake in 1965 with "hone in" and it is picked up. That doesn't make it any more correct.
The problem is, is that it does make it correct, as it becomes "adopted" by the language users. This is how language evolves. What defines language is how it is commonly used by convention.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
