Please see Styx thread on the Registered Shipmates consultation for the main discussion forums - your views are important, continues until April 4th.

Heaven: 2021 Proof Americans and Brits speak a different language

18990929495131

Comments

  • mousethief wrote: »
    "Swell" as an adjective expressing approval is very dated. It is dated to the 1950s at the most recent, I believe.
    .
    Do Brits say "Pardon my French" when they say something naughty?

    Not heard ‘’ Pardon my French’ since the 70’s. Even then only by women of a certain age.
  • My mother and grandmother, when surprised by something would say
    “ Well love a duck”. I think they had no idea it was a euphemism.
  • Leorning CnihtLeorning Cniht Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Gee D wrote: »
    Certainly affected, but not slightly archaic - very archaic is closer to the mark. I don't think I've heard it for over 40 years in ordinary speech.

    I've heard several people say "Pardon my French" to "excuse" their use of a mildly rude word. Whether it's common or not depends on the attitude to swearing in the circles in which you move.

    @Enoch: I get a lot of confused looks when I use the word "fortnight" here. It's about as current in the US as "sennight" in the UK. I hear Americans use "twice", but few people say "thrice".

    Americans talk about fractions a lot. There are "quarter dollar" and "half dollar" coins (although only the quarters are in routine use), musical notes are called "quarter notes" and "eighth notes" rather than "crotchets" and "quavers", drill bits, nuts and bolts are all sized in fractions (I have a 5/16 wrench in my pocket at the moment, as it happens) and so on.
  • Gee D wrote: »

    Americans talk about fractions a lot. There are "quarter dollar" and "half dollar" coins (although only the quarters are in routine use), musical notes are called "quarter notes" and "eighth notes" rather than "crotchets" and "quavers", drill bits, nuts and bolts are all sized in fractions (I have a 5/16 wrench in my pocket at the moment, as it happens) and so on.

    I think that although Brits may frequently refer to fractions of half, and quarter in general usage, the smaller fractions less so.
    Probably due to our complex relationship with continental Europe, which uses metric measurement. UK uses metric measurement increasingly for practical purposes, but still has cultural affinity with Imperial measurements.
  • Enoch wrote: »
    Some other odd differences of meaning, syntax and usage I've noticed over the last few years and which it's easy not to pick up on:-

    . . .

    2. USEnglish 'named' takes 'for', e.g. 'she was named for her mother's sister'; BrEnglish 'named' takes 'after' e.g. 'she was named after her mother's sister'.
    I hear "named for" and "named after" interchangeably in the America South.
    3. USEnglish 'ship' (verb) used to mean send e.g. in adverts, 'shipping now'; BrEnglish 'ship' (verb) has, until influenced by international internet sites, meant specifically 'send by boat'.
    Yes as to "ship" meaning "send" in the case of ordered merchandise. And of course, we wouldn't say "advert." It's an "advertisement" or an "ad." :wink:
    5. This one and the next come from Bible translations that have been anglicised using a spelling-checker but not read by a native BrEnglish speaker. USEnglish 'immorality' means specifically sexual misconduct. BrEnglish 'immorality' is more general and includes anything that is morally wrong, e.g. theft, dishonesty.
    It is not the case in my experience that "immorality" is used in America only to mean sexual immorality.
    6. The curious expression a 'bushel-basket'. BrEnglish doesn't use that. A 'basket' is a shopping basket or any other sort of container made of straw. A 'bushel' is an obsolete measure of volume, 8 UK gallons.
    I'm not sure how you've heard "bushel basket" used, but a "bushel basket" is simply a basket that holds a bushel in volume.
    7. Finally, in BrEnglish 'twice' and 'fortnight' are the normal words a person would say. I get the impression, but USians may want to correct me on this, that in USEnglish they sound a bit quaint and one would normally say 'two times' and 'two weeks'.
    As @Leorning Cniht says, you're right as to "fortnight." That sounds quintessentially British to American ears. But there's nothing at all unusual or quaint sounding here about "twice." I hear it all the time. Again as Leorning Cnihy says, it's "thrice" that sounds quaint; "three times" would be used instead.


    Penny S wrote: »
    Casserole. I came across a difference of meaning while trying to find the best setting for reheating one in the microwave. To me, a casserole is very like a stew, but cooked in the oven or a slow cooker (like Piglet's beef one for tonight) instead of on the hob. But all the ones I found online were not like that. A few sites advised slicing it before reheating, which implies a totally different texture. Another referred to the problem with the topping not being at its best, and there were pictures of casseroles with what looked like grated cheese or breadcrumbs on top.
    So I'm wondering if this is a pond difference.
    In the US, a casserole is a baked dish (so not cooked in a slow cooker) usually containing meat or some other protein, chopped vegetables and usually pasta, egg noodles, potatoes or some other starch, with a sauce or binder. Often there is a crunchy/breadcruimby or cheesy topping. (The tuna casserole of my youth was always topped with potato chips/crisps.)

    A casserole can function as a one-dish meal or as a side dish. In many parts of the country, casseroles, especially those made with ingredients like cream of mushroom soup, are staples of church potlucks. I know lots of Americans who don't think Thanksgiving dinner is complete without green bean casserole.

    Most casseroles I can think of are served with a spoon, but there are some—lasagna comes to mind—that can be sliced.

  • Enoch wrote: »
    Some other odd differences of meaning, syntax and usage I've noticed over the last few years and which it's easy not to pick up on:-

    2. USEnglish 'named' takes 'for', e.g. 'she was named for her mother's sister'; BrEnglish 'named' takes 'after' e.g. 'she was named after her mother's sister'.

    We actually use both forms.
    Enoch wrote: »

    5. BrEnglish uses the verb tense formed with 'have' much more than USEnglish. There was a discussion a few years ago about this on the Ship. The computer message 'did you forget your password?' in BrEnglish would be 'have you forgotten your password?'. 'Did you forget?' here refers to something that has happened in the past, even if very recent past like an hour ago. 'Have you forgotten?' refers to something that has happened and is still happening.

    We have the same distinction. However, there is a tendency in computer interfaces to (pardon me) "dumb down" language and grammar for the sake of people who are semi-literate or English-as-a-second-language. Thus the simple past instead of the perfect tense.
    Enoch wrote: »
    6. This one and the next come from Bible translations that have been anglicised using a spelling-checker but not read by a native BrEnglish speaker. USEnglish 'immorality' means specifically sexual misconduct. BrEnglish 'immorality' is more general and includes anything that is morally wrong, e.g. theft, dishonesty.

    This is also true in the U.S., but people often hunt for euphemisms for anything about sex--and those who are prissy about saying "adultery," "incest," "rape," "fornication," or event he word "sexual" (!) seize on "immorality" to cover the lot. Which then confuses their hearers into thinking that sexual sin is the only and proper meaning of the word "immorality."
    Enoch wrote: »
    7. The curious expression a 'bushel-basket'. BrEnglish doesn't use that. A 'basket' is a shopping basket or any other sort of container made of straw. A 'bushel' is an obsolete measure of volume, 8 UK gallons.

    AFAIK we don't have those around in common usage, at least anymore. I always took it to be a farming reference.
    Enoch wrote: »
    8. Finally, in BrEnglish 'twice' and 'fortnight' are the normal words a person would say. I get the impression, but USians may want to correct me on this, that in USEnglish they sound a bit quaint and one would normally say 'two times' and 'two weeks'. On this, I've also picked up that Australians don't refer to fractions, a half, a third, a quarter, a fifth, three eighths etc as readily as we do, but have no idea whether the same applies to USians.

    We certainly use fractions, and "twice" is a normal and completely un-noteworthy word. You won't hear "fortnight," though, unless it's in reference to the game.



  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    edited December 2020
    Enoch wrote: »
    Some other odd differences of meaning, syntax and usage I've noticed over the last few years and which it's easy not to pick up on:-
    From this Brit's point of view:
    Enoch wrote: »
    1. USEnglish, 'River' follows the name, e.g. the Jordan River; BrEnglish it precedes the name or is omitted altogether e.g just, the Jordan or the River Jordan. I think Australia follows US usage on this. The reason may be that rivers here already had their names before anyone spoke English, whereas in the US and Australia, rivers were discovered and then named. So in BrEnglish 'River' is an adjective and the name is a noun, but in USEnglish the name is an adjective and 'River' is a noun.
    I don't think that's quite right. 'Jordan' would usually be seen as qualifying 'River' to distinguish it from other rivers. But both words are nouns as in e.g. Senator Pelosi, or President Washington.
    Enoch wrote: »
    4. BrEnglish uses the verb tense formed with 'have' much more than USEnglish. There was a discussion a few years ago about this on the Ship. The computer message 'did you forget your password?' in BrEnglish would be 'have you forgotten your password?'. 'Did you forget?' here refers to something that has happened in the past, even if very recent past like an hour ago. 'Have you forgotten?' refers to something that has happened and is still happening.
    To me the difference between the two usages is that 'have you forgotten your password?' implies that you still can't remember it. Whereas 'did you forget…' allows for the possibility that the state no longer continues. E.g. 'I had trouble logging in on my laptop.' 'Did you forget your password?' 'Yes, that was the problem, then I remembered I had changed it to grandmother's maiden name.'
    Enoch wrote: »
    5. This one and the next come from Bible translations that have been anglicised using a spelling-checker but not read by a native BrEnglish speaker. USEnglish 'immorality' means specifically sexual misconduct. BrEnglish 'immorality' is more general and includes anything that is morally wrong, e.g. theft, dishonesty.
    In British English, too, 'immorality is sometimes used euphemistically for specifically sexual immorality.
    Enoch wrote: »
    6. The curious expression a 'bushel-basket'. BrEnglish doesn't use that. A 'basket' is a shopping basket or any other sort of container made of straw. A 'bushel' is an obsolete measure of volume, 8 UK gallons.
    I had always assumed that bushel-basket was a translational attempt to clarify for the contemporary reader what kind of thing a bushel might be. It has not been used as a normal unit of measure or as measuring device in Britain for decades now. I agree the 'normal' British usage would be just to refer to a bushel, and the phrase about 'not hiding your light under a bushel' persists even when people no longer remember the source or what a bushel is.
  • BroJames wrote: »
    I had always assumed that bushel-basket was a translational attempt to clarify for the contemporary reader what kind of thing a bushel might be. It has not been used as a normal unit of measure or as measuring device in Britain for decades now. I agree the 'normal' British usage would be just to refer to a bushel, and the phrase about 'not hiding your light under a bushel' persists even when people no longer remember the source or what a bushel is.

    There's a pick-you-own-apples orchard near me which sells apples by the bushel and the peck. One colleague (an older gentleman) grows various sorts of fruit, and talks about how many bushels he's picked.
  • Penny SPenny S Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Thanks Nick - and it makes it much clearer when applied to folks taking round a casserole to a person temporarily not able to feed themself properly. The stew type would not travel well. Potatoes would generally be the only starch component here, along with meat and other vegetables, but possibly not always present.
  • I have never heard "bushel basket" used in anything other than a historical context.
  • LydaLyda Shipmate
    Eirenist wrote: »
    I have recently been catching up with Donna Leon's Venetian novels featuring Comissario Brunetti, recommended by a former Bishop here as the only detective stories he knew of containing recipes. I have noticed how frequently in casual speech between the characters the first word is omitted completely, as in 'You like a coffee?' This grates on the British ear - we would say 'Would you like a coffee?' or 'D'you (do you) want a coffee?' It sounds brusque to me. Donna Leon is American, of course, recounting a conversation supposedly between Italian police officers. Presumably this is regular usage in the US rather than in Italy. Would any American shipmate care to comment?

    (Just catching up.)

    I don't know Italian but I know a little Spanish. In Spanish the pronoun is often part of the verb in usual speech such as in Quiere una quesadilla? (Do you want a quesadilla?). If you say Usted quiere una quesadilla? the Usted for You emphasizes that I'm trying to be clarify something- perhaps I didn't know if I understood correctly or maybe I'm ordering for more people so maybe she wants it or he wants it.

    Sorry that I don't know how to code for the opening Spanish question mark.
  • HeavenlyannieHeavenlyannie Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    I would never describe something with pasta in as a casserole, let alone lasagne as a casserole.
    The tuna casserole sounds like what I would calla tuna bake, including cheese or crumbly topping. Baked pasta is usually a ‘bake’ here in the UK.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    I generally wouldn’t describe lasagna as a casserole either, but it meets the definition, at least as “casserole” is used here.

    Meanwhile, I’d certainly refer to chicken tetrazzini—which I’ve invariably had with the pasta baked in, not with the chicken and sauce over pasta—as a casserole.

  • Lamb ChoppedLamb Chopped Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    "Casserole" in my experience means baked moist thingy with several ingredients, often layered, normally heavy on starch, suitable to be taken to a church potluck in and reheated. Being an actual soup or soupy stew will disqualify it (possibly because the liquid is so easy to spill). Soups and stews may also be taken to potlucks, but must--absolutely MUST, it's de rigeur--come in a crockpot. No real pots, even if there is a stove.
  • @Enoch Your thing about rivers sounds reasonable. However, there is one notable exception in the UK: the Welsh (so original British) for river is Afon, pronounced Avon. Yes, it is the river river 🤣
  • "Casserole" in my experience means baked moist thingy with several ingredients, often layered, normally heavy on starch, suitable to be taken to a church potluck in and reheated.

    I have it on good authority that Lutherans in Minnesota call that "hot dish".
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Enoch wrote: »
    Some other odd differences of meaning, syntax and usage I've noticed over the last few years and which it's easy not to pick up on:-

    1. USEnglish, 'River' follows the name, e.g. the Jordan River; BrEnglish it precedes the name or is omitted altogether e.g just, the Jordan or the River Jordan. I think Australia follows US usage on this. The reason may be that rivers here already had their names before anyone spoke English, whereas in the US and Australia, rivers were discovered and then named. So in BrEnglish 'River' is an adjective and the name is a noun, but in USEnglish the name is an adjective and 'River' is a noun.

    7. Finally, in BrEnglish 'twice' and 'fortnight' are the normal words a person would say. I get the impression, but USians may want to correct me on this, that in USEnglish they sound a bit quaint and one would normally say 'two times' and 'two weeks'. On this, I've also picked up that Australians don't refer to fractions, a half, a third, a quarter, a fifth, three eighths etc as readily as we do, but have no idea whether the same applies to USians.

    "River" can either precede or follow. It would be more common to refer to the River Jordan than the Jordan River, but for most others it usually follows. 4 main rivers in suburban Sydney and in each case "River" would follow. It sounds odd for it to precede. Then you get to the Murray and the Darling where it can precede or follow, or commonly be omitted - in giving river heights in radio programmes directed to country interests (and that's perhaps dating the practice), it would be usual to give the height for "the Murray" at Mildura, or "the Murrumbidgee" at Balranald. For most other inland rivers, "river" would follow - eg Macquarie River. In any event, the words together make a noun.

    Your phrase about the rivers being "discovered" in that simple form is just plain wrong. I assume that you mean "discovered by Europeans". The rivers were discovered millenia ago by the first inhabitants.

    As far as I am aware, it's common to refer to "a half, quarter, third etc". I would rarely have heard of "three-eighths" but more likely "a bit under half" or "a bit over a quarter".
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    @Enoch Your thing about rivers sounds reasonable. However, there is one notable exception in the UK: the Welsh (so original British) for river is Afon, pronounced Avon. Yes, it is the river river 🤣
    I thought of including an aside on that, but then thought it was too much of a digression.

    I've always imagined the reason is the same as with what used to be called Lake Nyasa in Africa. It's now Lake Malaŵi. Nyasa is the word for lake in the local language. Everyone has assumed that the explorer - possibly Dr Livingstone - who first found it, pointed at it and asked a bearer, 'What's that?' . The bearer replied 'a lake', i.e. Nyasa. The explorer assumed that was its name. So that's what it became in English. The Anglo-Saxons heard people referring to various local rivers as the river i.e. 'avon' and so that was what they called them.

  • Gee D wrote: »
    I've quickly skimmed some of Banjo Paterson's poems online, but can't find "swell" in there - I thought it was in The Man from Ironbark, but it's not. Paterson was writing from the 1890's.

    It appears to date back as far as James Hardy Vaux's 1812 A New and Comprehensive Dictionary of the Flash Language where the definition appears as:

    SWELL: a gentleman; but any well-dressed person is emphatically termed a
    swell, or a rank swell. A family man who appears to have plenty of money,
    and makes a genteel figure, is said by his associates to be in swell
    street. Any thing remarkable for its beauty or elegance, is called a
    swell article; so a swell crib, is a genteel house; a swell mollisher, an
    elegantly-dressed woman, etc. Sometimes, in alluding to a particular
    gentleman, whose name is not requisite, he is styled, the swell, meaning
    the person who is the object of your discourse, or attention; and whether
    he is called the swell, the cove, or the gory, is immaterial, as in the
    following (in addition to many other) examples: I was turned up at
    China-street, because the swell would not appear; meaning, of course, the
    prosecutor: again, speaking of a person whom you were on the point of
    robbing, but who has taken the alarm, and is therefore on his guard, you
    will say to your pall, It's of no use, the cove is as down as a hammer;
    or, We may as well stow it, the gory's leary. See COVE and DOWN.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    "Casserole" in my experience means baked moist thingy with several ingredients, often layered, normally heavy on starch, suitable to be taken to a church potluck in and reheated.

    I have it on good authority that Lutherans in Minnesota call that "hot dish".

    So I'm told!

    I'm looking forward to being brainwashed re-educated when LL has got himself thoroughly indoctrinated up there.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Barnabas_Aus - thanks for that, but those usages have approving connotations, while there's an edge to those a century or so later.
  • jedijudyjedijudy Heaven Host
    Oh, my gosh. I must be older than dirt!! I still use bushel as a measurement, and have often wished to have a bushel basket like those we used so often *cough* years ago!

    We also have a river river where I live! Caloosahatchee means Caloosa river. Most of us just call it the Caloosahatchee, but folks, especially visitors, will add 'river' to the end.

    And, you have brought back wonderful memories of my great, great aunt who used the word 'swell' frequently. As in, "Oh, that's just swell!", said with a twinkle in her eyes!
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Having grown up on an orchard farm, I certainly know what a bushel-basket means.

    A peck is about half a bushel in dry measurement.

  • la vie en rougela vie en rouge Purgatory Host, Circus Host
    Amy Klobuchar apparently served hot dish to her staffers to prove how Midwestern she was.
  • Amy Klobuchar apparently served hot dish to her staffers to prove how Midwestern she was.

    That would convince me. Either that or she listened to Prairie Home Companion.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited December 2020
    Eirenist wrote: »
    It sounds brusque to me. Donna Leon is American, of course, recounting a conversation supposedly between Italian police officers. Presumably this is regular usage in the US rather than in Italy. Would any American shipmate care to comment?

    It sounds like a usage I have heard in native speakers of Italian with imperfect English. I think I've heard it in native speakers of other romance languages, but I know I've heard it from Italians. It is not a use I have heard in native speakers of American English.

    The English grammatical construction involving "do" (or past tense "did") is quite unusual and I can well believe that native speakers of a lot of other languages would omit it.

    Indeed it's a little hard to understand why English-speakers decided that so many things require "doing", given that you have to wait for the other verb to find actually find out the relevant action. English requires "Do you want coffee?", but plenty of other languages manage to ask this question by turning "You want coffee." into "Want you coffee?".

  • After chewing over like and want, I realized that hereabouts, the commonest verb in this context is fancy. Thus, "fancy a coffee?", but I bet this is regional.
  • DafydDafyd Hell Host
    The River X construction isn't universal in British English: there are some Southern African rivers that are the X River: the Orange River and the Limpopo River, are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. I think the Orinoco River would more often be that than not, as would the Amazon when one needs to distinguish it from women warriors who deliver cutprice books.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    Having grown up on an orchard farm, I certainly know what a bushel-basket means.

    A peck is about half a bushel in dry measurement.

    There's four pecks to the bushel.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    orfeo wrote: »
    Eirenist wrote: »
    It sounds brusque to me. Donna Leon is American, of course, recounting a conversation supposedly between Italian police officers. Presumably this is regular usage in the US rather than in Italy. Would any American shipmate care to comment?

    It sounds like a usage I have heard in native speakers of Italian with imperfect English. I think I've heard it in native speakers of other romance languages, but I know I've heard it from Italians. It is not a use I have heard in native speakers of American English.

    The English grammatical construction involving "do" (or past tense "did") is quite unusual and I can well believe that native speakers of a lot of other languages would omit it.

    Indeed it's a little hard to understand why English-speakers decided that so many things require "doing", given that you have to wait for the other verb to find actually find out the relevant action. English requires "Do you want coffee?", but plenty of other languages manage to ask this question by turning "You want coffee." into "Want you coffee?".

    They may have got it from Brythonic. Gwneud - doing - is used extensively to form periphrastic verb tenses in Welsh - although not in the present tense in the modern language.

    Gwnes i mynd - I went; lit. I did going.

    It's theorised that Old English speakers whose communities previously spoke Brythonic brought these constructions and syntax habits into the language.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The River X construction isn't universal in British English: there are some Southern African rivers that are the X River: the Orange River and the Limpopo River, are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. I think the Orinoco River would more often be that than not, as would the Amazon when one needs to distinguish it from women warriors who deliver cutprice books.
    Yebbut. None of those rivers are in the British Isles. And I think I'd refer to both the Limpopo and the Orinoco by just their names. For me, that would also be so with the Amazon.

  • LeafLeaf Shipmate
    This is possibly a combination of Pond difference and generational difference, but it has been some time since people here spoke of natural features being "discovered" or "found" by Europeans. These natural features had been known to the inhabitants for thousands of years.
    Enoch wrote: »
    The reason may be that rivers here already had their names before anyone spoke English, whereas in the US and Australia, rivers were discovered and then named.
    Everyone has assumed that the explorer - possibly Dr Livingstone - who first found it, pointed at it and asked a bearer, 'What's that?' .
    I'm not here to police you. Part of the reason this thread exists is to point out differences in acceptable language by community and geography. Measures vary.

  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    Having grown up on an orchard farm, I certainly know what a bushel-basket means.

    A peck is about half a bushel in dry measurement.

    There's four pecks to the bushel.

    True, I goofed.
  • LydaLyda Shipmate
    Perhaps another way of explaining: "Everyone has assumed that the explorer - possibly Dr Livingstone - who first found it, pointed at it and asked a bearer, 'What's that?' " might be that Dr Livingstone, when he first saw it, asked a bearer, 'What's that?' .

    I realize that speaking of geographical features as being "discovered" by people of European descent is rightly a matter of some sensitivity, but I still tend to say things like "I discovered this lovely lake to picnic at".
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    Having grown up on an orchard farm, I certainly know what a bushel-basket means.

    A peck is about half a bushel in dry measurement.

    There's four pecks to the bushel.

    The old song (which will date me): I love you, A bushel and a peck, A bushel and a peck and a hug around the neck.
  • DafydDafyd Hell Host
    Sit down Gee D. You're rocking the boat.
  • LeafLeaf Shipmate
    Lyda wrote: »
    I realize that speaking of geographical features as being "discovered" by people of European descent is rightly a matter of some sensitivity, but I still tend to say things like "I discovered this lovely lake to picnic at".

    "... and I have named it Lyda Lake" would raise some eyebrows.
    ISTM that the comments about discovering and finding were in the context of Europeans choosing names for natural features in colonized places.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Leaf wrote: »
    Lyda wrote: »
    I realize that speaking of geographical features as being "discovered" by people of European descent is rightly a matter of some sensitivity, but I still tend to say things like "I discovered this lovely lake to picnic at".

    "... and I have named it Lyda Lake" would raise some eyebrows.
    ISTM that the comments about discovering and finding were in the context of Europeans choosing names for natural features in colonized places.
    Yes. There’s also, I think, a difference in saying, say, “he discovered x” and “he was the first European (or whatever) to discover x.” The former ignores those who were already living there, while the second doesn’t, at least not necessarily.

  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    KarlLB wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Eirenist wrote: »
    It sounds brusque to me. Donna Leon is American, of course, recounting a conversation supposedly between Italian police officers. Presumably this is regular usage in the US rather than in Italy. Would any American shipmate care to comment?

    It sounds like a usage I have heard in native speakers of Italian with imperfect English. I think I've heard it in native speakers of other romance languages, but I know I've heard it from Italians. It is not a use I have heard in native speakers of American English.

    The English grammatical construction involving "do" (or past tense "did") is quite unusual and I can well believe that native speakers of a lot of other languages would omit it.

    Indeed it's a little hard to understand why English-speakers decided that so many things require "doing", given that you have to wait for the other verb to find actually find out the relevant action. English requires "Do you want coffee?", but plenty of other languages manage to ask this question by turning "You want coffee." into "Want you coffee?".

    They may have got it from Brythonic. Gwneud - doing - is used extensively to form periphrastic verb tenses in Welsh - although not in the present tense in the modern language.

    Gwnes i mynd - I went; lit. I did going.

    It's theorised that Old English speakers whose communities previously spoke Brythonic brought these constructions and syntax habits into the language.

    Yes, I have heard that theory.
  • Pangolin GuerrePangolin Guerre Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    @KarlLB @Orfeo I don't know where you first got that, but I first ran across this in Elmar Ternes's work on the structure of Celtic languages, and he posits Celtic languages forming a substratum grammar for English. (Ternes died just this past summer.) Heinrich Wagner argued for a similar relationship between Hamitic and Semitic languages on the one hand, and Celtic languages, on the other. so, 'by association', there may be faint echoes of Coptic and Berber in English(!). One of my Norse professors, while accepting the concept of substratum grammars, found Wagner a step too far.

    Where did you guys pick it up?
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    The History of English Podcast, many many episodes ago...

    the guy planned to do the whole history in 100 episodes. He was never going to make it with his level of repetition. Episodes 141 to 143 just covered the Great Vowel Shift.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    orfeo wrote: »
    The History of English Podcast, many many episodes ago...

    the guy planned to do the whole history in 100 episodes. He was never going to make it with his level of repetition. Episodes 141 to 143 just covered the Great Vowel Shift.
    That’s one of my favorite podcasts. And yes, his original plan was 25 episodes on Indo-European and Proto-Germanic languages, 25 episodes on Old English, 25 episodes on Middle English and 25 episodes on Modern English.


  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    The History of English Podcast, many many episodes ago...

    the guy planned to do the whole history in 100 episodes. He was never going to make it with his level of repetition. Episodes 141 to 143 just covered the Great Vowel Shift.
    That’s one of my favorite podcasts. And yes, his original plan was 25 episodes on Indo-European and Proto-Germanic languages, 25 episodes on Old English, 25 episodes on Middle English and 25 episodes on Modern English.


    It's often very interesting, though some episodes I just end up exasperated at how he will say the same thing 3 or 4 different times. But the good stuff is sufficiently frequent to keep me listening.

    And as for the Great Vowel Shift episodes, well... I was constantly making mouth shapes and noises either at home or in the car, totally riveted. Probably hilarious if anyone had seen me. Then I posted some stuff on Facebook and at the end bet all my friends that they were now making funny noises. Given the number of friends that reacted with a laugh I think I was right.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    orfeo wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    The History of English Podcast, many many episodes ago...

    the guy planned to do the whole history in 100 episodes. He was never going to make it with his level of repetition. Episodes 141 to 143 just covered the Great Vowel Shift.
    That’s one of my favorite podcasts. And yes, his original plan was 25 episodes on Indo-European and Proto-Germanic languages, 25 episodes on Old English, 25 episodes on Middle English and 25 episodes on Modern English.


    It's often very interesting, though some episodes I just end up exasperated at how he will say the same thing 3 or 4 different times. But the good stuff is sufficiently frequent to keep me listening.
    I know what you mean about the repetition, but I always figure maybe that helps some listeners.

    And as for the Great Vowel Shift episodes, well... I was constantly making mouth shapes and noises either at home or in the car, totally riveted. Probably hilarious if anyone had seen me.
    You and me both. It also brought back lots of voice lessons and voice exercises.

  • Perfect! Another podcast to eat my time.....
  • Thank you guys. I hadn't come across this podcast before.
  • LydaLyda Shipmate
    My thanks, too! I enjoy linguistics but I'm often frustrated by trying to decipher pronunciation from just reading about it. I realize that pronunciation varies considerably but a recording at least gives me a jumping off point.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    You can all curse me later...
  • I didn't wait.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    There's an example of a difference in one of the thread titles on the Ship at the moment,
    Was Mary really at risk for stoning?
    In BrEnglish, that would be the wrong preposition. 'At risk' takes 'of' and not 'for'. It would be 'Was Mary really at risk of stoning?'

Sign In or Register to comment.