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

13839414344131

Comments

  • Hey British peoples. A Brit person speaking of a photograph of two men said, "Look your jumpers." I know what jumpers are. What does that locution mean? Look at? I like the look of? Wot?
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited February 2020
    mousethief wrote: »
    Hey British peoples. A Brit person speaking of a photograph of two men said, "Look your jumpers." I know what jumpers are. What does that locution mean? Look at? I like the look of? Wot?

    Doesn't mean anything to me. Did you mishear?

    Unless the intonation was "look! Your jumpers!" implying the addressee possessed identical knitwear.
  • I am very likely to mishear because of my hearing loss, which I will cop to, but this was in print.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    I am very likely to mishear because of my hearing loss, which I will cop to, but this was in print.

    Weird. Makes no more sense to me than it does to you.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    edited February 2020
    Jumpers? Could be a dress? Or even a sweater?

    The word "jumper" when used to mean a sweater comes from an obsolete term for a large, loose men's jacket called a jump. ... The terminology can be confusing because a jumper is also a sleeveless dress worn over a shirt or a one-piece article of clothing for a small child in both British and American English.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    ...a one-piece article of clothing for a small child in both British and American English.

    That would be a jumpsuit in my experience of British English.

  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited February 2020
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    Jumpers? Could be a dress? Or even a sweater?

    The word "jumper" when used to mean a sweater comes from an obsolete term for a large, loose men's jacket called a jump. ... The terminology can be confusing because a jumper is also a sleeveless dress worn over a shirt or a one-piece article of clothing for a small child in both British and American English.

    The question wasn't about the word "jumpers". Mousethief explicitly said that. It was about what on earth "Look your jumpers" meant.

    To which none of us have any idea.
  • Probably a derogatory comment, as in “imagine wearing jumpers like these!” Though, and the context might tell, it could be admiration. “Look at your jumpers, [how stylish].” Or maybe they were full of holes or were Christmas jumpers of the worst kind.
  • Probably 'Look! Your jumpers!' No idea what would have been odd about them?
  • Robert ArminRobert Armin Shipmate, Glory
    Might it have been an exhortation to members of a new religious group? "Look, you jumpers, for ahead lies the promised land of Trampoline!"
  • ROTFL
  • FirenzeFirenze Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Wasn't there a Monty Python sketch about an order of trampolining nuns?
  • PigwidgeonPigwidgeon Shipmate
    edited February 2020
    Firenze wrote: »
    Wasn't there a Monty Python sketch about an order of trampolining nuns?
    It seems to have been Peter Cooke and Dudley Moore:
    The Leaping Nuns of Norwich


  • Robert ArminRobert Armin Shipmate, Glory
    What more proof do you need?

    Someone earlier said that in the UK a jumper was a knitted garment for a small child. In my experience there is no age restriction; at this time of year I'm often wearing a jumper.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    A good jumper is sartorial comfort food.
  • A good jumper should win the Gold Cup at Cheltenham.
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Perhaps it's from an unpublished Shakespearean play?

    King {rising from throne and bellowing}: "Look you, jumpers! Stop thy dancing whilst I speak! Particularly you, Jester, with thine bells!"
  • Golden Key wrote: »
    Perhaps it's from an unpublished Shakespearean play?

    King {rising from throne and bellowing}: "Look you, jumpers!

    Welsh King, is he then?
  • As John Lennon said, "oompa, oompa, stick it up your jumper."
  • FirenzeFirenze Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    mousethief wrote: »
    As John Lennon said, "oompa, oompa, stick it up your jumper."

    He wasn't the first: it was a playground chant when I was a child.
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Golden Key wrote: »
    Perhaps it's from an unpublished Shakespearean play?

    King {rising from throne and bellowing}: "Look you, jumpers!

    Welsh King, is he then?

    Which bit of that signals Welsh, please?
  • Firenze wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    As John Lennon said, "oompa, oompa, stick it up your jumper."

    He wasn't the first: it was a playground chant when I was a child.

    I think now I remember reading that.
  • MMMMMM Shipmate
    Golden Key, ‘look you’.

    MMM
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Hmmm...I think the wildest chant at my school's playground was:
    Cinderella,
    Dressed in yella
    Went downstairs
    To meet her fella.
    How many kisses
    Did she get?

    (counting up from there)

    It was a jump-rope rhyme.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Golden Key wrote: »
    Golden Key wrote: »
    Perhaps it's from an unpublished Shakespearean play?

    King {rising from throne and bellowing}: "Look you, jumpers!

    Welsh King, is he then?

    Which bit of that signals Welsh, please?
    @Golden Key "Look you" is what stage Welsh people are supposed to say in a Welsh accent, the Welsh equivalent of "Och-Aye" and "Begorrah".
  • And of course not actually used by anyone.
  • mousethiefmousethief Shipmate
    edited February 2020
    Was Hamlet Welsh when he said, "This most excellent canopy, the air, look you"?
  • Enoch wrote: »
    "Look you" is what stage Welsh people are supposed to say in a Welsh accent, the Welsh equivalent of "Och-Aye" and "Begorrah".
    I’m now hearing it in the voice of Ruth Madoc in Hi De Hi.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited February 2020
    mousethief wrote: »
    Was Hamlet Welsh when he said, "This most excellent canopy, the air, look you"?

    No, he was reflecting a sentence construction that's common in a lot of European languages but that English has dispensed with.

    Hamlet is of course Danish and I'm pretty sure you could say this in Danish.
  • What has English dispensed with? "Look you"? We've just dropped off the "you" -- it's hardly a loss of an idiom.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    edited February 2020
    mousethief wrote: »
    What has English dispensed with? "Look you"? We've just dropped off the "you" -- it's hardly a loss of an idiom.

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    EDIT: Also, I don't think you could modernise Hamlet's sentence just by dropping the word "you". Having "look" at the end there feels very weird. You need to put the "look" command at the front. Look at this most excellent canopy, the air.
  • mousethiefmousethief Shipmate
    edited February 2020
    Gucken Sie.

    *look you
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Of course, English has also stupidly lost the ability to distinguish singular "you" and plural "you".

    The "Sie" reminded me. Because German, Danish and English (and probably all the Germanic languages?) all had the same idea of using a plural word to be polite to an individual.

    German still does this. Danes seemed to have stopped bothering a couple of generations ago and are informal with everyone. And English got stuck perpetually in formal mode a few centuries ago.
  • orfeo wrote: »
    Of course, English has also stupidly lost the ability to distinguish singular "you" and plural "you".

    The "Sie" reminded me. Because German, Danish and English (and probably all the Germanic languages?) all had the same idea of using a plural word to be polite to an individual.

    German still does this. Danes seemed to have stopped bothering a couple of generations ago and are informal with everyone. And English got stuck perpetually in formal mode a few centuries ago.

    Then English, perversely, wrongly decided the singular form was the polite form, and ended up creating Bible (and service) translations which use "thou" for God and "you" for everybody else.
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Re "look you":

    I knew nothing of any Welsh reference or stereotype. I was only referring to a phrase from the Bard. And my made-up king wasn't of any particular nationality, ethnicity, nor realm. Just a grumpy king, possibly with a headache, who was of a time to use "look you" to get the attention of an annoying, dancing crowd.
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    mousethief wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Of course, English has also stupidly lost the ability to distinguish singular "you" and plural "you".

    The "Sie" reminded me. Because German, Danish and English (and probably all the Germanic languages?) all had the same idea of using a plural word to be polite to an individual.

    German still does this. Danes seemed to have stopped bothering a couple of generations ago and are informal with everyone. And English got stuck perpetually in formal mode a few centuries ago.

    Then English, perversely, wrongly decided the singular form was the polite form, and ended up creating Bible (and service) translations which use "thou" for God and "you" for everybody else.

    Yup.
  • Robert ArminRobert Armin Shipmate, Glory
    Hamlet is well known as a Celtic miscellany. There is the Irishman who accompanies the prince on his abortive attempt to kill the king. In distress of mind Hamlet comments, "I could do it now, Pat, while he is praying".
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.
  • FirenzeFirenze Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    orfeo wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.

    A singularly poignant one at that. Though it has to be said that Hopkins is on a fairly far out branch of anyone's linguistic tree.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Of course, English has also stupidly lost the ability to distinguish singular "you" and plural "you".

    The "Sie" reminded me. Because German, Danish and English (and probably all the Germanic languages?) all had the same idea of using a plural word to be polite to an individual.

    German still does this. Danes seemed to have stopped bothering a couple of generations ago and are informal with everyone. And English got stuck perpetually in formal mode a few centuries ago.

    Then English, perversely, wrongly decided the singular form was the polite form, and ended up creating Bible (and service) translations which use "thou" for God and "you" for everybody else.
    Not quite.

    Most modern western European languages, only use the 2nd personal singular for addressing close family etc in some way. French does. I'm told Welsh does. Early modern English, as in the seventeenth century did. 'Thou' when it was still in general use, rather than only found in dialects, was used much the same way as 'tu' or 'du'. They are, though, equally likely to use the 2nd person singular for addressing God. This is not something that was new with English bible translations.

    Why, I don't know.

    However, in koiné Greek this doesn't appear to have been the case. It seems to use the 2nd person singular for addressing one person, whether an equal, an inferior, a superior or God, and the 2nd person plural for addressing more than one person.

    I don't know whether colloquial late Latin followed koiné or was more like subsequent western European languages. Can anyone oblige?

    I've heard, but this may have been a joke, that in some parts of the US Southern States, it is more respectful to address a single important person, a state governor, say, as 'yall'.
  • Robert ArminRobert Armin Shipmate, Glory
    orfeo wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.

    Very beautiful poetry and not, I would have said, that hard to understand: "Can you, with your young fresh thoughts, care as much about leaves as you do about human beings?" (Now some Hopkins really is tricky!)
  • orfeo wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.

    Very beautiful poetry and not, I would have said, that hard to understand: "Can you, with your young fresh thoughts, care as much about leaves as you do about human beings?" (Now some Hopkins really is tricky!)

    It foxed me. I didn't link "can you" with "care" at all.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    edited February 2020
    Re: thou/you for close family - on the island of Westray in Orkney, where my grandmother came from, some people still address one another as "thou" - pronounced "thoo": "Tommy, would thou pass the salt?".

    I'm inclined to think it's a throwback from Norse/Scandinavian languages, as in đu in Icelandic, but I'm open to correction.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Piglet wrote: »
    Re: thou/you for close family - on the island of Westray in Orkney, where my grandmother came from, some people still address one another as "thou" - pronounced "thoo": "Tommy, would thou pass the salt?".

    I'm inclined to think it's a throwback from Norse/Scandinavian languages, as in đu in Icelandic, but I'm open to correction.
    Could be, but doesn't need to be. That's almost OK as seventeenth century English, when it would have been 'wouldst thou'. In dialect further south and more recent, 'wǝdsta pass ǝt salt'.

  • orfeo wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.

    Very beautiful poetry and not, I would have said, that hard to understand: "Can you, with your young fresh thoughts, care as much about leaves as you do about human beings?" (Now some Hopkins really is tricky!)

    It's downright fucking Yoda.
  • Enoch wrote: »
    Most modern western European languages, only use the 2nd personal singular for addressing close family etc in some way. French does. I'm told Welsh does. Early modern English, as in the seventeenth century did. 'Thou' when it was still in general use, rather than only found in dialects, was used much the same way as 'tu' or 'du'. They are, though, equally likely to use the 2nd person singular for addressing God. This is not something that was new with English bible translations.

    Why, I don't know.

    The issue is why "thou" fell away in every other case except the case of God. As far as I know the first Bible translation to reflect this is the RSV, which was published in 1952. I am open to correction on that (the usage, not the year).
  • Piglet wrote: »
    Re: thou/you for close family - on the island of Westray in Orkney, where my grandmother came from, some people still address one another as "thou" - pronounced "thoo": "Tommy, would thou pass the salt?".

    I'm inclined to think it's a throwback from Norse/Scandinavian languages, as in đu in Icelandic, but I'm open to correction.

    The form is the same in Old Norse and Old English so it comes from both.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Firenze wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.

    A singularly poignant one at that. Though it has to be said that Hopkins is on a fairly far out branch of anyone's linguistic tree.

    Very poignant and a great poem overall. That word "wanwood" is an invention by Hopkins but it carries meaning and emotion by the tonne.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited February 2020
    orfeo wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »

    Yes I know. I'm just pointing out that lots of languages (probably including Welsh but not exclusively) have the "you", in order to identify who is supposed to be doing the looking. We've decided there's no need.

    Or leaves, like the things of man, you
    With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?

    I can only presume that's poetry because it's frankly incomprehensible.

    Very beautiful poetry and not, I would have said, that hard to understand: "Can you, with your young fresh thoughts, care as much about leaves as you do about human beings?" (Now some Hopkins really is tricky!)

    I'd have thought the other way around - can you care for people as much as you are now grieving the fallen leaves and the bare forest?
Sign In or Register to comment.