Proof Americans and Brits speak a different language

16162646667119

Comments

  • Getting tired, again, of Brits thinking they're the only people in the world who use words correctly.
  • Does non-US English ever use "shag" for a kind of carpet/rug? (Rugs Direct) Deep pile, can dig your toes in. The really deep stuff is like a floppy lawn. If you drop anything in it, might take a while to find it!
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    I know the term ‘shag-pile’ for that kind of carpet, but I don’t know how much it is used.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    BroJames wrote: »
    I know the term ‘shag-pile’ for that kind of carpet, but I don’t know how much it is used.

    Depends how many people around have retained fourth-form senses of humour, like me.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    Getting tired, again, of Brits thinking they're the only people in the world who use words correctly.

    To be fair, I think there's only one actually doing that.

    "Talk to" can be a conversation in UK usage - "Perhaps I can offset those costs against tax - I need to talk to my accountant about that".
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    Australian usage pretty much follows UK here (as is the general trend).
  • EirenistEirenist Shipmate
    Twenty-odd years ago, my youngest daughter came home on vacation from her university. 'Mum and Dad, I want to have words with you.' We waited apprehensively. 'You're too reasonable!' Apparently, when her flatmates were complaining about their parents, she had nothing to contribute. As I said, that was more than twenty years ago.
  • Robert ArminRobert Armin Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Golden Key wrote: »
    Does non-US English ever use "shag" for a kind of carpet/rug? (Rugs Direct) Deep pile, can dig your toes in. The really deep stuff is like a floppy lawn. If you drop anything in it, might take a while to find it!

    Yes, I've heard shagpile regularly as a description of carpet. So often, in fact, it hardly even generates an internal snigger.

    And, "I was talking to (my oldest friend) last night," is also very common. I don't think I've heard, "I was talking with," over here, but I'm old and miss a lot.
  • orfeo wrote: »
    Australian usage pretty much follows UK here (as is the general trend).

    This whole thread is about perceptions, in many ways. When I lived in Australia for three years I was struck by how American the language was. Then again, the bits that were the same as the UK I probably accepted without comment as they were "normal".
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Australian usage pretty much follows UK here (as is the general trend).

    This whole thread is about perceptions, in many ways. When I lived in Australia for three years I was struck by how American the language was. Then again, the bits that were the same as the UK I probably accepted without comment as they were "normal".

    Yes, no doubt you'd be tuned to the differences.

    I'm not being terribly scientific about it, but I certainly get the impression that when there's a US/UK divide we fall more often on the UK side. But it's also definitely true that we don't fall on the same side all of the time.

    And then of course we have all the examples where we just make other stuff up that completely bamboozles English-speakers on both sides of the Atlantic.

    Everyone bamboozles others in some way of course. The fascinating thing about language is that you can get very specific about variations. I'm aware of at least a couple of things that are quite local to this city, with place names that make zero sense to anyone visiting (though most will be too polite to point this out).
  • Firenze wrote: »
    I'm thinking a typo.
    You’re right - I really must proofread before posting ☹️☹️
  • orfeo wrote: »
    And then of course we have all the examples where we just make other stuff up that completely bamboozles English-speakers on both sides of the Atlantic.

    The rest of us find that part of your charm.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    BroJames wrote: »
    I know the term ‘shag-pile’ for that kind of carpet, but I don’t know how much it is used.

    Depends how many people around have retained fourth-form senses of humour, like me.
    I obviously have and mix with people with the 'wrong' sort of sense of humour. Yes, I've heard of 'shag-pile' used of carpets, but it would be difficult here to get away with using the term without somebody suggesting it's describing just the sort of carpet for an enjoyable romantic interlude in front of a nice blazing fire.

  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Enoch wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    BroJames wrote: »
    I know the term ‘shag-pile’ for that kind of carpet, but I don’t know how much it is used.

    Depends how many people around have retained fourth-form senses of humour, like me.
    I obviously have and mix with people with the 'wrong' sort of sense of humour. Yes, I've heard of 'shag-pile' used of carpets, but it would be difficult here to get away with using the term without somebody suggesting it's describing just the sort of carpet for an enjoyable romantic interlude in front of a nice blazing fire.

    A fourth form sense of humour is fairly standard in Brits. I mean we invented Those Seaside Postcards, Viz, Carry On and as far as I can tell, toilet jokes.
  • The alternate use of "shag" (is that Australian? UK? Both?) would have amused my dad. Back when he was working he had what was then called a "shag haircut", and his nickname at the firehouse was "Shag."
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    A fourth form sense of humour is fairly standard in Brits. I mean we invented Those Seaside Postcards, Viz, Carry On and as far as I can tell, toilet jokes.

    And, of course, Captain Blackadder does a rather good line in rough shag.

    Don't know whether that use (for rolling tobacco) is current - don't know anyone that smokes the stuff any more.
  • There are some interesting differences in the use of plurals versus singular.

    People here get addicted to drugs, but they are drug addicted, not drugs addicted. They take math in school, not maths.

    I also wondered about driving. Do you have a driver's licence or a driving licence? and do you spell licence the noun with the "c" at the end? I see people using license for the noun I think in the US but not sure.
  • I also wondered about driving. Do you have a driver's licence or a driving licence? and do you spell licence the noun with the "c" at the end? I see people using license for the noun I think in the US but not sure.
    Here, almost everyone calls it a driver’s license (yes, with an s), except the relevant statutes and the government agency that issue them. Per the statutes and the agency, it’s a driver license.

  • There are some interesting differences in the use of plurals versus singular.

    People here get addicted to drugs, but they are drug addicted, not drugs addicted. They take math in school, not maths.

    I think your drugs thing is universal. The question of how one abbreviates mathematics (nobody AFAIK calls it mathematic) isn't really about singular and plural at all - "maths" isn't the plural of "math".


  • Years ago, concerning practice and practise, I was taught that we "c/see" the noun. Does that work in all cases?
  • It’s always spelled practice in the US, whether as a verb or noun.

  • Thank you. This was a comment made by one of my teachers, when I was 13, so it may be out of date in the UK also.
  • Practice is always with a c in American English. In British English the verb is with an s. I remember it by comparing it with advice and advise where the difference is pronounced. I think the same thing is true of licence, license.
    My driving licence says "Driving licence" on it, but I think in NZ, they call it a driver's licence. I'm guessing it would be the same in Aus.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    Having been on these British boards for a while, when I first saw the term shag-pile the first thing that came to mind was orgies. Just a dirty mind today.

    Yes, I remember shag carpets--they were very dirty. The main reason why they went out of style.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Here, you study maths at school, not math. I don't recall heRing math used in any context.

    Nick Tamen - we use licence/practice for the noun and license/practise for the verb.

    Jonah the Whale - I have just checked and the card I have is called a Driver Licence. No idea about the other States or Territories and I've not checked what the legislation says of the correct name, if anything. If I were speaking or writing, I'd normally call it either a driver's licence or driving licence without thinking which term I was using, nor why I'd use one and not the other.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Getting tired, again, of Brits thinking they're the only people in the world who use words correctly.

    Well, it's bizarre to criticize "visit with" in the US sense. I might as well say that "put up with" doesn't make sense, because what is up? Language is not like arithmetic.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    It's not "put up with", it's "up with which I shall not put".
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    It’s always spelled practice in the US, whether as a verb or noun.

    Unlike prophecy/prophesy.
  • Not that you'd ever guess that from the way most of us speel.
  • EirenistEirenist Shipmate
    I thought this thread's title was 'Proof Americans and Brits speak a different language'. If we are speaking different language in the Uk from (than for US shipmates) neither usage is more 'correct' than the other. That is the point. We are two lands divided by a common speech. But all Brits know that Americans, like the Irish, are Brits who have somehow gone wrong.
  • Eirenist wrote: »
    But all Brits know that Americans, like the Irish, are Brits who have somehow gone wrong.
    :grin:

    Perhaps we should name the version spoken over the pond Amerenglish? (Over the Irish Sea, of course, they speak Irglish.)
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    The fascinating thing is, there are numerous cases where it's the Americans that have preserved the earlier form of English and the Brits that have changed.

    You arguably can't have "gone wrong" if you're not the ones who have gone anywhere. When Americans have maintained a pronunciation or expression that everyone was using back in the 1700s, the question is why the Brits started doing something different.

    I'd have to go hunting to remember good examples (look, I just had wine with dinner), but there are plenty of supposed 'Americanisms' that are not American inventions at all. They're just things that were preserved in America and lost elsewhere.
  • Surely we all feel, deep within our bones, that the way we do things is RIGHT and that any difference is therefore wrong? I've been enjoying this thread as an exploration of differences, and a reminder that such an assumption isn't correct.

    Since @mousethief's comment yesterday I've been wondering if I was the person pissing people off by acting as though British English was the only correct form. It could well have been; it's the sort of "joke" I do make, which can backfire. I am sorry for that, and apologise.
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    Surely we all feel, deep within our bones, that the way we do things is RIGHT and that any difference is therefore wrong? I've been enjoying this thread as an exploration of differences, and a reminder that such an assumption isn't correct.

    Nevertheless, I draw the line at calling the middle course of a 3-course meal the entree. That's just plain illogical. What the hell are you entering?

  • That's new to me. Where does that happen?
  • Isn't gotten an example of preservation of an old form in the US? But there are plenty. Forgotten preserves the -en ending in many English dialects, although, I think "I had forgot it" exists in some dialects..
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    That's new to me. Where does that happen?

    USA and I think also Canada though I can't recall.

    Confused the hell out of me when I went out with friends in California. They ordered entrees and then both they and the waiter were satisfied that was the end of the conversation.
  • Surely we all feel, deep within our bones, that the way we do things is RIGHT and that any difference is therefore wrong? I've been enjoying this thread as an exploration of differences, and a reminder that such an assumption isn't correct.

    Since @mousethief's comment yesterday I've been wondering if I was the person pissing people off by acting as though British English was the only correct form. It could well have been; it's the sort of "joke" I do make, which can backfire. I am sorry for that, and apologise.

    Quite a lot of people think that way. I used to teach linguistics, and the introductory stuff on descriptive and prescriptive approaches made some people uncomfortable, since surely their dialect was superior, but quite a lot of people quickly accepted the relativity of one's point of view, and one's dialect. But then Standard English has been the prestige dialect. But some people think their own dialect is inferior, like I don't talk proper.
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    I recently heard some VERY interesting things about African-American English, in a podcast episode centred around the completely over-inflated controversy about 'Ebonics' teaching a couple of decades back.

    Children are effectively having to learn a 2nd form of language when they get to school because the first form that they learned is considered 'wrong' rather than dialect.
  • orfeo wrote: »
    I recently heard some VERY interesting things about African-American English, in a podcast episode centred around the completely over-inflated controversy about 'Ebonics' teaching a couple of decades back.

    Children are effectively having to learn a 2nd form of language when they get to school because the first form that they learned is considered 'wrong' rather than dialect.

    It's not all that surprising. Linguistic snobbery is strong in the UK, and while I couldn't speak for other countries, snobbery is probably universal, plus racism.

    Personal note, I went to a posh school, and I was told my Lancashire accent was unacceptable. I still remember the teacher who said it, and his name was Twatshitbastardly.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    It’s always spelled practice in the US, whether as a verb or noun.

    Unlike prophecy/prophesy.
    Or advice and advise (which are, of course, pronounced differently).


    Since @mousethief's comment yesterday I've been wondering if I was the person pissing people off by acting as though British English was the only correct form. It could well have been; it's the sort of "joke" I do make, which can backfire. I am sorry for that, and apologise.
    I feel pretty confident in saying that the person in question was the one saying that the usage that differed from British usage “makes no sense,” not you. :wink:


    And yes, the main course of a meal is also called the entrée here. The Wiki tells me that: “The stages of the meal underwent several significant changes between the mid-16th and mid-17th century, and notably, the entrée became the second stage of the meal, and potage became the first. At this point, the term "entrée" had lost its literal meaning and had come to refer to a certain type of dish, unrelated to its place in the meal.” It gets even more complicated after that, it seems.

  • I speak Canajin, eh. Mon Français comes from Hockey Night In Canada** and the backs of cereal boxes***.

    **He shoots he scores.

    ***So go riboflavin your niacinamide.
  • I grew up in deepest, darkest Dorset, the sort of tiny village you have to be a real local ¹ to know where it is, and visited my grandparents there throughout my childhood, moving into their old house as a young teenager. My father's family comes from the West Country. I found it fascinating at the time because a lot of Dorset dialect words are regarded as Americanisms - sidewalk and fall are two that jump to mind immediately - plus the pronunciation of ask as aks and wasp as wopsy (I wondered where I'd learned that one). And some sounded old English - feeling all leery meaning hungry when the German for empty is leer or leere ².

    There's an article here (link to Dorset Echo) which includes this joy:
    Boris-noris: to go on recklessly without thought to risk or decency

    ¹ population of 120 including outlying farms;
    ² link to Wikipedia
  • Sorry,I am a bit late to this interesting discussion,but I have never heard of 'besuchen mitt' in German. 'mitt' as such does not exist, though one might see something like 'Mittag'(midday) or 'Mitternacht' (midnight).
    I visit a friend would be ich besuche einen Freund.
    You might say 'Meine Tante besuche ich mit einem Freund' (I visit my aunt with a friend)

    I don't want to take this too far but , 'der Besuch' is a noun which means 'the visit' in English,but the word can also be used in German to mean 'visitors' in general.
    we have visitors = wir haben Besuch or der Besuch ist da = the visitors are here
    'Visite' hoever is thwe expression in German for the doctor's round or a housecall
  • Wet KipperWet Kipper Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    mousethief wrote: »
    "Shag."

    you're daaaaahm right
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    Forthview wrote: »
    Sorry,I am a bit late to this interesting discussion,but I have never heard of 'besuchen mitt' in German. 'mitt' as such does not exist, though one might see something like 'Mittag'(midday) or 'Mitternacht' (midnight).
    I visit a friend would be ich besuche einen Freund.
    You might say 'Meine Tante besuche ich mit einem Freund' (I visit my aunt with a friend)

    I don't want to take this too far but , 'der Besuch' is a noun which means 'the visit' in English,but the word can also be used in German to mean 'visitors' in general.
    we have visitors = wir haben Besuch or der Besuch ist da = the visitors are here
    'Visite' hoever is thwe expression in German for the doctor's round or a housecall

    Fairly obvious that "mit" was meant, not "mitt".
  • orfeo wrote: »
    I recently heard some VERY interesting things about African-American English, in a podcast episode centred around the completely over-inflated controversy about 'Ebonics' teaching a couple of decades back.

    Children are effectively having to learn a 2nd form of language when they get to school because the first form that they learned is considered 'wrong' rather than dialect.

    Let me slightly reorient that.

    No doubt there are many who still call it "wrong" but that is not the reason academia-as-a-whole teaches them the standard(er) dialect. We do it because otherwise their career prospects are sharply limited. This too is a bad state of affairs, but schools are largely forced to deal with the world as it is, not the world as it ought to be, and in the US, just as elsewhere, there is a ranking of dialects. Californian/Midwest seems to come out on top, probably due to Hollywood etc. New York and New Jersey are in the middle and speakers from the deep South can face some prejudice regardless of race. And Spanglish, Vinglish, etc. are entirely non-privileged.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Aye, but there's a world of difference between teaching about register and the place of standard and non-standard forms therein, and telling people their dialectual forms are wrong and they should always talk this way instead.

    For some reason getting people to understand and accept dialectual variation seems harder than accentual.
  • Yes, it's the should that kills.
  • FirenzeFirenze Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    I know what it was. Back when Mitt Romney was running for President (dear fond days) the joke was that were he elected, and were he to speak to the German Chancellor, the dialogue would go:

    'Mitt Romney'.

    'Ja. Aber wer ist mit Romney?'
    *

    *Yes. But who is with Romney?
Sign In or Register to comment.