Question about UK vernacular and expletives

[NRSASD]

Hello Playground!

As an ignorant American, I have to ask a question about our cousins across the pond and their use of language. I've heard that a certain word that rhymes with "floody" is a very strong expletive in UK English. On the scale of severity, how bad is it? Stub your toe bad, or wrecking your partner's car bad? Also, how do you describe something that has blood on it? Is it still an expletive then? I know these are kinda silly questions, but its bothered me for far longer than I'd like to admit.

Thank you for any and all input!

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Hello Playground!

As an ignorant American, I have to ask a question about our cousins across the pond and their use of language. I've heard that a certain word that rhymes with "floody" is a very strong expletive in UK English. On the scale of severity, how bad is it? Stub your toe bad, or wrecking your partner's car bad? Is it still an expletive then?

Mild enough to be the expletive of choice of an 11 year old Ron Weasley in the PG film "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" upon discovering his train companion is The Harry Potter (or possibly upon seeing the scar; memory's a bit fuzzy).


Also, how do you describe something that has blood on it?
"Bloody" works fine. Context is key.

GW

[Anonymouswizard]

Bloody is so mild a swear I barely here it these days. It's also mild enough that as long as my parents aren't around I'll freely use it for emphasis. So around the level of 'stubbed your toe' or 'computer isn't responding'.

Also, as has been said, context is key. It's relatively clear in speech, the word has different emphasis when being used as a swear in my experience, but even in text it's relatively easy to separate the two. Here's an example:

'The bloody jacket ripped.'

'Geoff was found wearing a bloody jacket.'

Okay, so maybe it isn't always clear, the second one is equally valid for either, but the context will make it clear. 'Two nights ago there was a stabbing in the town square and Geoff showed up at my wearing a bloody jacket.'

[DataNinja]

Mild enough to be the expletive of choice of an 11 year old Ron Weasley in the PG film "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" upon discovering his train companion is The Harry Potter (or possibly upon seeing the scar; memory's a bit fuzzy).

That's now making me recall reading the Philosopher's Stone as a kid, and not understanding why anyone would be surprised that the Bloody Baron was... literally covered in blood.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

That's now making me recall reading the Philosopher's Stone as a kid, and not understanding why anyone would be surprised that the Bloody Baron was... literally covered in blood.

As usual, Pratchett managed to make fun of this kind of misunderstanding:


“Your friend Mr. Tulip would perhaps like part of your payment to be the harpsichord?" said the chair.
"It's not a ―ing harpsichord, it's a ―ing virginal," growled Mr. Tulip. "One ―ing string to a note instead of two! So called because it was an instrument for ―ing young ladies!"
"My word, was it?" said one of the chairs. "I thought it was just of sort of early piano!”


~ Terry Pratchett, The Truth

GW

[Red Fel]

I'm reminded of a rather delightful little nugget from A Bit of Fry and Laurie, one of the cocktail ending sketches. They're tossing out mildly obscene cocktail names, and Jeanine asks, "What's a Sodding Mary?" To which Stephen responds, naturally, "Like a Bloody Mary, but a little bit ruder."

So, yes. Rather on the lower end of the scale.

Then again, there are certainly parts of any country where even strong profanity is something more akin to background noise, wouldn't you say?

[Ebon_Drake]

That's now making me recall reading the Philosopher's Stone as a kid, and not understanding why anyone would be surprised that the Bloody Baron was... literally covered in blood.

That's a stretch by Rowling. I can't remember that particular part of the book, but even as a Brit taking the name "the Bloody Baron" literally (or at least as an Ivan the Terrible-style moniker) makes far more sense. Unless everyone was saying his name in a very flippant way that could be taken along the lines of "irritating", but that wouldn't really jibe with his description in the books - though moreso his appearance in the films.

[lio45]

Also, as has been said, context is key. It's relatively clear in speech, the word has different emphasis when being used as a swear in my experience, but even in text it's relatively easy to separate the two. Here's an example:

'The bloody jacket ripped.'

'Geoff was found wearing a bloody jacket.'

Okay, so maybe it isn't always clear, the second one is equally valid for either, but the context will make it clear. 'Two nights ago there was a stabbing in the town square and Geoff showed up at my wearing a bloody jacket.'

It's amusing - well, to me at least :P - to imagine a context where it works both ways. Let's say I just had an accident, I'm wounded and bleeding, my jacket is full of blood, and being wounded I'm presently struggling to get rid of it as a first step towards trying to figure out the extent of my wounds, while you're watching paralyzed, then I say "Help me get rid of that bloody jacket, will you?"

[factotum]

Yeah, "bloody" is an incredibly mild expletive that's barely ever heard these days--which is why British audiences found Marcus Cole in B5 saying "That's a bloody awful lot of ships!" rather ridiculous, because that sounded old-fashioned even in the mid-90s, much less in the 2250s setting of the series.

[Peelee]

Yeah, "bloody" is an incredibly mild expletive that's barely ever heard these days--which is why British audiences found Marcus Cole in B5 saying "That's a bloody awful lot of ships!" rather ridiculous, because that sounded old-fashioned even in the mid-90s, much less in the 2250s setting of the series.

I think I can identify with this! It's probably similar to how in the Atmos episode of Dr. Who, the American kid kept saying "clever" instead of "smart." Which wasn't so noticeable until he kept saying "I'm cleverer than X" a bunch of times in a row, and it sounding really awkward in an American accent.

[NRSASD]

Thanks! I had no idea where it fell on the spectrum, so thanks for the info. My fiance stoutly maintained that it was on par with "duck", but neither of us actually knew. Has its severity mellowed in recent years? Was it a lot worse in the near past (1950's-ish)?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Was it a lot worse in the near past (1950's-ish)?

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say most insults expletives (other than replacements like "sugar" for "****", which start mild) were once "worse", and they become milder as they are used and their shock value is lessened by them becoming commonplace, leading to the need to introduce new ones who are now "worse". Eventually, they fall into disuse, and a generation later they can once again be "bad" when resurrected.

There used to be a time, for example, when referencing "God's Hooks" (i.e. the nails used to crucify Jesus) was a terrible imprecation. Today, all that is left of it is "Gadzooks", which is so mild grandmas probably use it. I suspect many other insults follow similar paths.

GW

[Frozen_Feet]

Stub your toe bad, or wrecking your partner's car bad?

????

Is that suppsed to be a scale? Because I swear exactly as bad in both situations. And half the words would be censored if I tried to translate. :smalltongue:

[Knaight]

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say most insults (other than replacements like "sugar" for "****", which start mild) were once "worse", and they become milder as they are used and their shock value is lessened by them becoming commonplace, leading to the need to introduce new ones who are now "worse". Eventually, they fall into disuse, and a generation later they can once again be "bad" when resurrected.

I'd split insults into a few categories here, which have different severity trajectories. Swearing is generally being interpreted as more mild - it's basically punctuation among most younger people, where it's still a big deal for many among the elderly. On the other hand, straight up slurs seem to be going in the other direction, where there's still a lot of acceptance among the elderly and the youth are generally a bit more hostile to them. These generational tends within a given time period then map well to cultural trends across a few generations.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I'd split insults into a few categories here, which have different severity trajectories. Swearing is generally being interpreted as more mild - it's basically punctuation among most younger people, where it's still a big deal for many among the elderly. On the other hand, straight up slurs seem to be going in the other direction, where there's still a lot of acceptance among the elderly and the youth are generally a bit more hostile to them. These generational tends within a given time period then map well to cultural trends across a few generations.

Yes, I used the wrong word. I said "insult" but I meant the much narrower category of "expletive". My bad.

GW

[Manga Shoggoth]

Yeah, "bloody" is an incredibly mild expletive that's barely ever heard these days--which is why British audiences found Marcus Cole in B5 saying "That's a bloody awful lot of ships!" rather ridiculous, because that sounded old-fashioned even in the mid-90s, much less in the 2250s setting of the series.

It depends a lot on where you are in the country and who you are with. It is still current, but how strong it is and how often it is used varies. It is quite surprising how much language changes across the country.

I'm a lot further south than Factotum, and I hear it a fair bit (although the ladies usually object to it quite strongly). On the other hand it used to be common currency in the parts of Yorkshire where I did my degree.

I wonder if anyone has ever done a survey of swear word usage by region - an admittedly quick search came up with naught.

[Brother Oni]

I'm a bit more south (and a lot more west) than Manga Shoggoth and it's a very mild and infrequent swear word (depending on the generation of the person using it - it's less common among younger folk).

I can't find a swear word by region for the UK (a linguist by the name of Jack Grieve did a map for the US via twitter analysis and it's interesting reading) and the best I can find is an Ofcom list of swear words ranked with regard to strength and acceptability before the watershed. 'Bloody' is described as "Mild language, generally of little concern. Frequently used in everyday language to express emotion, and not usually as a directed insult.".


Reason: Removed Peelee - wrong "Birmingham"...

I was wondering why every time I read Peelee's location I got the opening hook for 'Sweet Home Alabama' triggering in my head and now I know why - it's the same Birmingham and now I'm going to have that bloody song stuck in my head all day... :smallsigh:

[Peelee]

Reason: Removed Peelee - wrong "Birmingham"...

Fun fact! We stole more EnglandBritish? city names around these parts. I grew up in Inverness, there's a big outlet mall in Leeds, I got friends over in Oxford, and let me tell you, you do not want to to to Kingston upon Hull.
Mostly because that last one doesn't exist, of course.
The other cities were got aren't pronounced like any reasonable person would think they are, like Helena and Mobile. You're pronouncing them wrong in your mind right now, I tells ya!



I was wondering why every time I read Peelee's location I got the opening hook for 'Sweet Home Alabama' triggering in my head and now I know why - it's the same Birmingham and now I'm going to have that bloody song stuck in my head all day... :smallsigh:
Even more fun facts! There are three kinds of people in Alabama. People who hate that song, people who haven't been here long enough, and people who have heard it so much that it killed their souls.

[Jormengand]

that bloody song

All right, folks, I think the thread's gone full circle.

:smalltongue:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

All right, folks, I think the thread's gone full circle.

:smalltongue:

Bloody Hel, that was quick. It's still the first bloody page and all.

GW

[Heliomance]

Yeah, "bloody" is an incredibly mild expletive that's barely ever heard these days--which is why British audiences found Marcus Cole in B5 saying "That's a bloody awful lot of ships!" rather ridiculous, because that sounded old-fashioned even in the mid-90s, much less in the 2250s setting of the series.

:smallconfused: I use "bloody" all the bloody time (okay, I only did that because of the thread :P). It's probably my number one go-to intensifier, and "bloody hell" or "bloody hellfire" my favourite expletive. But yes, it's very mild - I generally consider that I don't swear except under extreme provocation, but bloody, bugger, balls, bollocks, and crap are all in my arsenal. Also arsemarbles, that's a fun one.

[Manga Shoggoth]

Fun fact! We stole more England city names around these parts. I grew up in Inverness, there's a big outlet mall in Leeds, I got friends over in Oxford, and let me tell you, you do not want to to to Kingston upon Hull.

Yup. Sounds just like home...

[Peelee]

Yup. Sounds just like home...

Also, I could kick myself for not thinking of this one before...

I'm a lot more south than Manga Shoggoth and Brother Oni, and I rarely hear people say "bloody" at all!

[Aedilred]

Fun fact! We stole more England city names around these parts. I grew up in Inverness...
Oh dear. :smalltongue:

[Peelee]

Oh dear. :smalltongue:

England = Great Britain = UK. There is no difference between the three. I'm quite surprised you don't know that, living in London and all. Now, let me fix that...

[NontheistCleric]

That's now making me recall reading the Philosopher's Stone as a kid, and not understanding why anyone would be surprised that the Bloody Baron was... literally covered in blood.

Maybe they just thought he had killed a lot of people in life. Aristocrat name prefixes and suffixes are not always completely literal.

[lio45]

.. and "bloody hell" or "bloody hellfire" my favourite expletive.

Fascinating! And you make it sound natural, I imagine?

[Heliomance]

Fascinating! And you make it sound natural, I imagine?

Well, I assume so. It's interesting - on thinking about it, there's actually a slight difference in how I use the two curses, I think. "Bloody hellfire" has shades of resignation to it, in my mind. It quite often gets used when my code isn't working: "Oh bloody hellfire, what's gone wrong this time?"

"Bloody hell" has more tones of shock or surprise to it: "Bloody hell that's expensive", "Bloody hell, what happened here?!"

[Anonymouswizard]

You see, to me the worst bloody can be is 'I'm rather annoyed with this bloody piece of technology' or 'you were a bloody idiot doing that', but to my dad it's a lot worse (as is all swearing).

[Brother Oni]

England = Great Britain = UK. There is no difference between the three. I'm quite surprised you don't know that, living in London and all. Now, let me fix that...

To the average Londoner, anywhere north of the Watford Gap is essentially north of The Wall ala A Song of Ice and Fire and anywhere west of Reading is vaguely West Country-shire and once you get off the motorway, you're in yokel country. :smalltongue:

I wonder what the UK equivalent of banjo twanging is... the clash of sticks and morris bells?

[factotum]

To the average Londoner, anywhere west of Reading is vaguely West Country-shire and once you get off the M4 (M5 at a stretch), you're in yokel country. :smalltongue:

And everything north of Watford is Northern England, don't forget! :smallsmile:

[Brother Oni]

And everything north of Watford is Northern England, don't forget! :smallsmile:

Was editing that in when you posted. :smallbiggrin:

[Anonymouswizard]

To the average Londoner, anywhere north of the Watford Gap is essentially north of The Wall ala A Song of Ice and Fire and anywhere west of Reading is vaguely West Country-shire and once you get off the motorway, you're in yokel country. :smalltongue:

I grew up in High Wycombe, but went to university in the outskirts of London (not London proper, but close enough for the full loan). I used to joke that some of my fellow students considered Wycombe (which is in the home counties for those who don't know) to be the North, ideally to Northerners.

I also continually insist that Birmingham is the North, but that's mainly to annoy Brummies I know. The midlands are a myth!

[comicshorse]

Speaking as someone born in Nottingham, thems fightin' words !

Outside ! Now ! I'll beat you.......So what's good for you Magic : the Gathering ? Star Trek Trivia ? Talisman ?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well, I assume so. It's interesting - on thinking about it, there's actually a slight difference in how I use the two curses, I think. "Bloody hellfire" has shades of resignation to it, in my mind. It quite often gets used when my code isn't working: "Oh bloody hellfire, what's gone wrong this time?"

"Bloody hell" has more tones of shock or surprise to it: "Bloody hell that's expensive", "Bloody hell, what happened here?!"
For me:

Bloody: annoyance ("Bloody car's not starting")
Bloody hell: surprise ("You've won the lottery on your first try? Bloody Hell!")
Bloody hellfire: disgust ("They're relocating you? Bloody hellfire")
Bloody hellfire and damnation: tired anger ("[Political figure] did [something that will affect millions just to line his pockets]. Bloody Hellfire and damnation")

Grey Wolf

[Serpentine]

Australian calling in. Here "bloody" is practically punctuation, and "bloody f-ing" is a commonplace adjective.

[Peelee]

To the average Londoner, anywhere north of the Watford Gap is essentially north of The Wall ala A Song of Ice and Fire and anywhere west of Reading is vaguely West Country-shire and once you get off the motorway, you're in yokel country. :smalltongue:

I wonder what the UK equivalent of banjo twanging is... the clash of sticks and morris bells?

Banjo? Look here, Richie Rich, I don't know what kind of yokel country y'all got up there, but banjos done cost a couple hunnerd down here. That there's good money what can be spent on cinderblocks to prop a car up, or beer 'n fireworks.

[Aedilred]

To the average Londoner, anywhere north of the Watford Gap is essentially north of The Wall ala A Song of Ice and Fire and anywhere west of Reading is vaguely West Country-shire and once you get off the motorway, you're in yokel country. :smalltongue:

I wonder what the UK equivalent of banjo twanging is... the clash of sticks and morris bells?

It's ok, I'm a Westcountryman really, just one who went up to the big smoke in search of gold-paved streets for a few years, and am now back where I belong. Within a few weeks, I won't even technically live in London any more.

[Thufir]

To the average Londoner, anywhere north of the Watford Gap is essentially north of The Wall ala A Song of Ice and Fire and anywhere west of Reading is vaguely West Country-shire and once you get off the motorway, you're in yokel country. :smalltongue:

Conversely to a geordie, anything south of the Tyne is the South.
Of course, as someone who was born in London and then moved up to the Tyneside area, I'm just geographically confused.

[Mr Blobby]

For this, I use the 'chip shop' rule; you know you're oop North when you can get gravy and/or brown sauce. Mushy peas is much more a serious thing too; it was only visiting there which I learned that the 'mushies' I'd had as a kid [in the South] weren't really proper ones...

[Glorthindel]

To the average Londoner, anywhere north of the Watford Gap is essentially north of The Wall ala A Song of Ice and Fire

Especially amusing because the majority of Londoners repeat the "anything north of the Watford Gap" without knowing where it is. For those that don't know, "Watford Gap" is a service station on the M1 near the village of Watford, which is 60 miles further north of the town of Watford (which pretty much abuts London). Most Londoners assume the term references the town.

[Mr Blobby]

I thought for most Londoners, anything further north than the M25 / Cockfosters was 'here be Dragons' territory. *smirks*

[Anonymouswizard]

I thought for most Londoners, anything further north than the M25 / Cockfosters was 'here be Dragons' territory. *smirks*

All true Englishmen know that the UK consists of three places. There's London, where all the decent stuff is, the North, which is full of people who appear in Coronation Street, and Wales, which is full of sheep.

Alright, I know there's more stuff to the UK, specifically the place with the Tartan and that place where Nelson fell down.

[Mr Blobby]

Aren't you forgetting MidMarpleShire? A delightful location filled with thatched villages, haunted manors and forelock-tugging werewolves? I always go there to stock up on Woodbines, powdered egg and gramophone needles at the village shop. Though it's not a place to live, what with the extremely high murder rate and the fact it's still the early 1950's.

[Keltest]

Is it weird that I stopped being able to tell if the names are parody or not?

[Heliomance]

Is it weird that I stopped being able to tell if the names are parody or not?

Honestly, Midmarple would be a perfectly reasonable name for an English village, or even town. The addition of "shire", however, denotes a county of which Midmarple is the primary town, which makes it far easier to dismiss as fantasy. Main towns of counties tend to have more sensible names. Like Gloucester (pronounced Gloster).

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly, Midmarple would be a perfectly reasonable name for an English village, or even town. The addition of "shire", however, denotes a county of which Midmarple is the primary town, which makes it far easier to dismiss as fantasy. Main towns of counties tend to have more sensible names. Like Gloucester (pronounced Gloster).

Remember that Americans have no idea how names are pronounced, they can't even get Birmingham right, they'd probably pronounce it like the words 'mid marple' or something stupid like that :smalltongue:

[Heliomance]

Remember that Americans have no idea how names are pronounced, they can't even get Birmingham right, they'd probably pronounce it like the words 'mid marple' or something stupid like that :smalltongue:

Who wants to guess how you pronounce the village of Woolfardisworthy? (Yes, this is an actual English village.)

Woolsery. Yes, really.

[factotum]

Who wants to guess how you pronounce the village of Woolfardisworthy? (Yes, this is an actual English village.)

Oh, there are dozens of examples like that. "Cogenhoe" is a village where my grandparents had a small holiday home, but they always pronounced it "Cug-noe". Then there are the names that not even Englishmen can agree on how they're pronounced, like the River Nene (which I, as most born in Northampton, call the "Nen" but which is "Neen" to those strange people over Peterborough way).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Oh, there are dozens of examples like that. "Cogenhoe" is a village where my grandparents had a small holiday home, but they always pronounced it "Cug-noe". Then there are the names that not even Englishmen can agree on how they're pronounced, like the River Nene (which I, as most born in Northampton, call the "Nen" but which is "Neen" to those strange people over Peterborough way).

England: where their king is incapable of pronouncing (https://grammarusage.wordpress.com/2013/06/15/river-thames-pronunciation/) the name of the river that goes through his capital, so the entire country switches to the incorrect pronunciation... and then make fun of the Spanish (http://www.cranberryletters.com/home/2014/3/23/the-origin-of-the-spanish-lisp) for supposedly doing the same, even though that bit never actually happened.
Yes, I know the King George story is also probably a myth
GW

[Anonymouswizard]

and then make fun of the Spanish (http://www.cranberryletters.com/home/2014/3/23/the-origin-of-the-spanish-lisp) for supposedly doing the same, even though that bit never actually happened.

We just didn't want them to feel left out. We English make fun of everybody, the French, the Chinese, Americans, the Germans, the French, the English, the Irish, the Scottish, and the French are just a few of our favourites.

[Brother Oni]

We just didn't want them to feel left out. We English make fun of everybody, the French, the Chinese, Americans, the Germans, the French, the English, the Irish, the Scottish, and the French are just a few of our favourites.

That's a defining British trait, never taking anything too serious and I do mean everything. During the Battle of the Imjin River during the Korean War, the 650 men of the Gloucestershire Regiment was facing something like 10,000 Chinese combatants. After weathering the attacks for ~3 days, the American general in charge asked for a situation report from the Gloucesters' colonel and was told 'Things are a bit sticky here at the moment'.

The general thought that meant 'things aren't too serious' whereas translated through the filter of British understatement, it meant "Situation urgent; send reinforcements immediately". Unfortunately by the time the American leadership understood the situation, it was far too late; only 40 Gloucesters managed to escape the encirclement, with all the others captured or killed.

[Peelee]

Remember that Americans have no idea how names are pronounced, they can't even get Birmingham right, they'd probably pronounce it like the words 'mid marple' or something stupid like that :smalltongue:

Ya know, since y'alls Birmingham once used our skyline for their website, I'd argue that we have better claim to the Birmingham name now. So YOU GUYS pronounce it wrong!

[Spacewolf]

That's a defining British trait, never taking anything too serious and I do mean everything. During the Battle of the Imjin River during the Korean War, the 650 men of the Gloucestershire Regiment was facing something like 10,000 Chinese combatants. After weathering the attacks for ~3 days, the American general in charge asked for a situation report from the Gloucesters' colonel and was told 'Things are a bit sticky here at the moment'.

The general thought that meant 'things aren't too serious' whereas translated through the filter of British understatement, it meant "Situation urgent; send reinforcements immediately". Unfortunately by the time the American leadership understood the situation, it was far too late; only 40 Gloucesters managed to escape the encirclement, with all the others captured or killed.

My understanding of that battle was that Abit sticky was at the point they were out of ammo and throwing tins of food at the enemy to keep them at bay.

[Peelee]

That's a defining British trait, never taking anything too serious and I do mean everything. During the Battle of the Imjin River during the Korean War, the 650 men of the Gloucestershire Regiment was facing something like 10,000 Chinese combatants. After weathering the attacks for ~3 days, the American general in charge asked for a situation report from the Gloucesters' colonel and was told 'Things are a bit sticky here at the moment'.

The general thought that meant 'things aren't too serious' whereas translated through the filter of British understatement, it meant "Situation urgent; send reinforcements immediately". Unfortunately by the time the American leadership understood the situation, it was far too late; only 40 Gloucesters managed to escape the encirclement, with all the others captured or killed.

I read a British-to-American translation guide online once. Can only clearly remember a few, such as "that's not bad" means "that is quite good," and "that's not too bad at all" means "BEST. THING. EVER."

[factotum]

We just didn't want them to feel left out. We English make fun of everybody, the French, the Chinese, Americans, the Germans, the French, the English, the Irish, the Scottish, and the French are just a few of our favourites.

I think you forgot the French, and I think the French ought to be included too? :smallsmile:

[Anonymouswizard]

Ya know, since y'alls Birmingham once used our skyline for their website, I'd argue that we have better claim to the Birmingham name now. So YOU GUYS pronounce it wrong!

You know, if the US had any actual history, say a thousand years or more of it, they might understand a thing called seniority.

Translated into American, 'get off our name you dang whippersnappers'.


I think you forgot the French, and I think the French ought to be included too? :smallsmile:

Well, consisting my French friends is still surprised I find time to insult and belittle everyone else :smallwink:

Honestly, if she ever stopped insulting me it would be the end of the friendship, so it's only fair to return fire.

Although your talons is not too bad, well done.

[Peelee]

You know, if the US had any actual history, say a thousand years or more of it, they might understand a thing called seniority.

Look, the old guy who's worked for his whole life in the company certainly knows what he's talking about. But the young guy who got promoted over the old guy has seniority.:smalltongue:

[factotum]

Look, the old guy who's worked for his whole life in the company certainly knows what he's talking about. But the young guy who got promoted over the old guy has seniority.:smalltongue:

Yeah, but everyone knows that's purely down to nepotism and the young guy spends all his time on the golf course doing nowt while the company is *really* run by the old dude. :smalltongue:

[Manga Shoggoth]

Look, the old guy who's worked for his whole life in the company certainly knows what he's talking about. But the young guy who got promoted over the old guy has seniority.:smalltongue:

Actually, the term is used for both length of service and position in hierarchy...


seniority
1 The fact or state of being older or higher in rank or status than someone else. ‘26 archbishops and bishops in order of seniority’
2 A privileged position earned by reason of longer service or higher rank. ‘pay and benefits rise with seniority’

[Anonymouswizard]

Look, the old guy who's worked for his whole life in the company certainly knows what he's talking about. But the young guy who got promoted over the old guy has seniority.:smalltongue:

Nah, that's position/rank :smalltongue:

I mean seniority as respect for experience anyway, as that's mostly how it's used in my experience.

[Peelee]

Yeah, but everyone knows that's purely down to nepotism and the young guy spends all his time on the golf course doing nowt while the company is *really* run by the old dude. :smalltongue:
Look. All I'm saying is that once the young guy ran away from home, the rest of the family kind of broke apart. And then the young guy saved the company from a couple of hostile takeovers.

And the best part? None of it would have happened if it weren't for the French:smalltongue:

Nah, that's position/rank :smalltongue:

I mean seniority as respect for experience anyway, as that's mostly how it's used in my experience.

Oh, ok. That makes sense.

In that case, we did respect your Birmingham's experience... until our Birmingham became better.

[GloatingSwine]

In that case, we did respect your Birmingham's experience... until our Birmingham became better.

I am not sure if you are aware of this, but being better than Birmingham is not a high bar to clear.

[Peelee]

I am not sure if you are aware of this, but being better than Birmingham is not a high bar to clear.

I'm not sure you're aware of this, but that is true for both Birminghams.:smallbiggrin: For reals. We're usually in the top 10 murder per capita in the country. If you ever visit, DON'T GO TO ENSLEY.

[Vinyadan]

Banjo? Look here, Richie Rich, I don't know what kind of yokel country y'all got up there, but banjos done cost a couple hunnerd down here. That there's good money what can be spent on cinderblocks to prop a car up, or beer 'n fireworks.

Is that a reference to Richard Rich, Baron Rich? :D

[Peelee]

Is that a reference to Richard Rich, Baron Rich? :D

Possibly. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richie_Rich_(comics)).

[Knaight]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, but that is true for both Birminghams.:smallbiggrin:
To be fair, your Birmingham has been the source of some excellent and important writing. Specifically one of its jails.

[Peelee]

To be fair, your Birmingham has been the source of some excellent and important writing. Specifically one of its jails.

You're not wrong, but being famous for being outstandingly racist back when everyone was already really racist is not the best legacy you want to have around, ya know? Imean, we got better, but there's a helluva history.

[Wardog]

Yeah, "bloody" is an incredibly mild expletive that's barely ever heard these days--which is why British audiences found Marcus Cole in B5 saying "That's a bloody awful lot of ships!" rather ridiculous, because that sounded old-fashioned even in the mid-90s, much less in the 2250s setting of the series.

I often get the impression that American film/tv producers think that "bloody" and "wanker" are the only expletives/swear words in Britain, and so have British characters use them all the time, even when they wouldn't be appropriate (e.g. too rude, or too mild for the situation, or have nuances that don't quite fit how they're being used).


Who wants to guess how you pronounce the village of Woolfardisworthy? (Yes, this is an actual English village.)

Woolsery. Yes, really.

Not quite as incongruous, but near where I live, there's a village called Hatch Beauchamp (pronounced "Hatch Beecham"). There's also Mousehole in Cornwall, pronounced "Mowsel".

[Vinyadan]

I think Beauchamp means "beautiful field" in Frech.

[Eldan]

I often get the impression that American film/tv producers think that "bloody" and "wanker" are the only expletives/swear words in Britain, and so have British characters use them all the time, even when they wouldn't be appropriate (e.g. too rude, or too mild for the situation, or have nuances that don't quite fit how they're being used).



Not quite as incongruous, but near where I live, there's a village called Hatch Beauchamp (pronounced "Hatch Beecham"). There's also Mousehole in Cornwall, pronounced "Mowsel".

QI once talked about the noble family of Toolmake-Toolmake, pronounced Toolmake-Dolmash

[Heliomance]

I often get the impression that American film/tv producers think that "bloody" and "wanker" are the only expletives/swear words in Britain, and so have British characters use them all the time, even when they wouldn't be appropriate (e.g. too rude, or too mild for the situation, or have nuances that don't quite fit how they're being used).



Not quite as incongruous, but near where I live, there's a village called Hatch Beauchamp (pronounced "Hatch Beecham"). There's also Mousehole in Cornwall, pronounced "Mowsel".

Don't forget Beaulieu in Hampshire, pronounced "Bewlee". Because heaven forfend that we should be consistent in how we corrupt French.

[Khedrac]

Don't forget Beaulieu in Hampshire, pronounced "Bewlee". Because heaven forfend that we should be consistent in how we corrupt French.

I tend to wonder how many staff at the estate agents "Belvoir" (of which we have an office in town) know that it is usually pronounced "Beaver" (well that's how the Duke of Belvoir and Vale of Belvoir are pronounced).

On the subject of British expletives, some people swear (relatively mildly) a lot (and usually don't seem to realise it) - stories abound of a mother telling their child off after hearing they have been swearing at school, as usually told the mother is claiming not to knwo where the child got it from - when every other word out of the mother's mouth is a swearword.

The films 'Kingsman: The Secret Service' and 'Kingsman: The Golden Circle' are probably fairly realistic looks at the "swearing without thinking about it" end of British English.

[Serpentine]

In Australia there's one town called Colac and another called Colac Colac.
They're pronounced "KO-lak" and "klak-klak" respectively.

[lio45]

I think Beauchamp means "beautiful field" in Frech.

I don't know what Fresh is but in French it's a common last name and does mean beautiful field. (Obviously meant for a cultivated field, but the other senses of the word happen to be similar too, i.e. electromagnetic field, etc.)

[FilippoLippi]

I tend to wonder how many staff at the estate agents "Belvoir" (of which we have an office in town) know that it is usually pronounced "Beaver" (well that's how the Duke of Belvoir and Vale of Belvoir are pronounced).


Duke of Rutland, who lives at Belvoir Castle, which I could see from here if it weren't for the trees. Lots of villages with Norman French names around here where the pronunciation has drifted markedly.

And Leicester, of course. And Lugerberuger

[Khedrac]

Duke of Rutland, who lives at Belvoir Castle
I thank you for the correction.

Hey, I grew up in Somerset and my mother claimed that I have a touch of a Bristle accent so I think I am doing well to get the pronunciation even close!

[Heliomance]

Duke of Rutland, who lives at Belvoir Castle, which I could see from here if it weren't for the trees. Lots of villages with Norman French names around here where the pronunciation has drifted markedly.

And Leicester, of course. And Lugerberuger

How's the latter pronounced? I've not heard of it.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

How's the latter pronounced? I've not heard of it.

'Bob'

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

I don't care, I'll always say it with long Us and hard Gs in my heart.

[Manga Shoggoth]

How's the latter pronounced? I've not heard of it.

Loughborough, which looks like it should be spelled Lugerberuger, actually has two sylables: Luff-Brrr

[Anonymouswizard]

And people think our mint sauce is weird...

[Aedilred]

Loughborough, which looks like it should be spelled Lugerberuger, actually has two sylables: Luff-Brrr

I would give it three(ish): "borough" can be elided to one but conventionally has two, and it is "borough" in this instance, rather than "burgh", after all. It's a close call, though.

[GloatingSwine]

I would give it three(ish): "borough" can be elided to one but conventionally has two, and it is "borough" in this instance, rather than "burgh", after all. It's a close call, though.

Yeah, but if you lived in Leicestershire (Lestashir) you wouldn't, it'd be Luffbruh.

Like Southwark in Nottingham (Nottnam) is actualy Suthark.

(The trick is that the letters are there to annoy foreigners).

[Heliomance]

Loughborough, which looks like it should be spelled Lugerberuger, actually has two sylables: Luff-Brrr
Oh, right. If you'd spelt it right, I'd have known what you're talking about! I'm a Brit too.


I would give it three(ish): "borough" can be elided to one but conventionally has two, and it is "borough" in this instance, rather than "burgh", after all. It's a close call, though.

Nah, it's Luff-bruh.

[factotum]

I pronounce it "Luffburuh", and I lived there for two summer holiday jobs while at University--don't recall how the locals would pronounce it, though!

[Vinyadan]

It's sort of turning into "Luv u bro"

[snowblizz]

Just as an interesting aside to the thread, in Wheel of Time they use "bloody" alot (author is American), along with burning, and blinded, all in reference to the "Light" effeictively the settings "Good force" and it has started me on doing the same. At least that's how it feels.


Also, Bloody Mary the queen. Used to figuratively descirbed her heinouseness or just point out she was slightly annoying? :smallbiggrin:

(OK yes I know the answer but the thought struck me reading half of page 1)


Also pronounciation of English and other British place names makes no bloody sense at all! Change the spelling or learn to pronounce them dammit! Wreaks havoc on our scores in oral tests.

[Anonymouswizard]

Also pronounciation of English and other British place names makes no bloody sense at all! Change the spelling or learn to pronounce them dammit! Wreaks havoc on our scores in oral tests.

We have learnt to pronounce them, it's not our fault if you can't read.

Next you'll tell us that Featherstonhaugh isn't spelt as it sounds. The connection is obvious.

EDIT: On that note, I'm off to ask a dyslexic friend how he copes living in England.

[BWR]

Fotheringay-Phipps.

[Brother Oni]

Next you'll tell us that Featherstonhaugh isn't spelt as it sounds. The connection is obvious.

That one's 'fan-shaw' isn't it?

[Khedrac]

That one's 'fan-shaw' isn't it?

I think so, how are you with "Chomondley" (I once knew one of them at school).

[Peelee]

Look, I get that you Brits have crazy spellings and even crazier pronunciations. And yet I'd like to see just one of you come over here and try to pronounce Arab. And yet, it's exactly like how you'd expect it'd be pronounced in Alabama.

[FilippoLippi]

Yeah, but if you lived in Leicestershire (Lestashir) you wouldn't, it'd be Luffbruh.

Like Southwark in Nottingham (Nottnam) is actualy Suthark.

(The trick is that the letters are there to annoy foreigners).

Southwell, pronounced "Suth'ull" if you're not as affected as my mum, is the place in notts

Southwark is in London.

Apparently, this dropping syllables from place names is a known thing in linguistics, just wish I had the references for you

[Vinyadan]

Syncope, maybe?

[Brother Oni]

I think so, how are you with "Chomondley" (I once knew one of them at school).

I've not heard that one, but Wikipedia says 'Chum-ly'.

Incidentally, whoever thought to put those pop ups and examples over the IPA pronunciation is a genius.


Look, I get that you Brits have crazy spellings and even crazier pronunciations. And yet I'd like to see just one of you come over here and try to pronounce Arab. And yet, it's exactly like how you'd expect it'd be pronounced in Alabama.

From my exposure to Alabama culture through US media, I'm guessing 'Ey-rab'.

Japanese is the one that drives me nuts though - due to the way the Japanese half-arsed borrowing of Chinese characters over the years, a single character can have multiple pronunciations. For example, the character 人 can be read in one of 11 different ways depending on context (jin, nin, hito, ri, ji, to, ne, hiko, fumi, ndo or bito).

[Peelee]

From my exposure to Alabama culture through US media, I'm guessing 'Ey-rab'.

I'll give you full points, mostly because it's really hard to phonetically show the slackjawed "rab" in there.

[snowblizz]

I'll give you full points, mostly because it's really hard to phonetically show the slackjawed "rab" in there.

If I can see the statetrooper that just pulled someone over, with pilotsunglasses, stetson* and all, saying it do I get extra credit?:smallbiggrin:


*it's the closest I can describe it, it's not as "cowboy-y" as that though

[Brother Oni]

I'll give you full points, mostly because it's really hard to phonetically show the slackjawed "rab" in there.

'Ey-raab'? 'Eh-raaab'?

[Peelee]

If I can see the statetrooper that just pulled someone over, with pilotsunglasses, stetson* and all, saying it do I get extra credit?:smallbiggrin:


*it's the closest I can describe it, it's not as "cowboy-y" as that though
Yes. Also, super bonus points for the hat. Always with the hats. Like a cross between a forgot hat and an old-timey election hat.

'Ey-raab'? 'Eh-raaab'?
Yeah. "Eh" like the Fonz saying it, and "raab," like "ran" or "ram," and usually more drawn out, depending on who's saying it. Legit how it's pronounced. Can't say it without sounding like a country bumpkin.

[Anonymouswizard]

Next you'll all be telling me that Hell for Certain isn't pronounced halloumi. You yanks can't pronounce anything!

[Frozen_Feet]

Japanese is the one that drives me nuts though - due to the way the Japanese half-arsed borrowing of Chinese characters over the years, a single character can have multiple pronunciations. For example, the character 人 can be read in one of 11 different ways depending on context (jin, nin, hito, ri, ji, to, ne, hiko, fumi, ndo or bito).

Japanese would be more logical than English if they'd done the sensible thing to stick with hiragana and ditch kanji.

But nooooo, they just have to insist on using three parallel writing systems. Or four now if you count Roman alpahbet and numerals.

Really, if you ask me, Finnish is the only language with sensible mapping of pronounciation to writing. Too bad about the rest of it. :smalltongue:

---

Related to an above remark about Americans missing nuance of British swear words... since when have swear words had nuance?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Really, if you ask me, Finnish is the only language with sensible mapping of pronounciation to writing. Too bad about the rest of it. :smalltongue:

I encourage you to look into Spanish. Five vowel sounds, mapped 1-1 to vowel letters (except "u", which is silent in when between q/g and e/i), ~20 consonant sounds, mapped 1-1 to consonant letters (except c, g, and r, that can have a soft and hard sound), and 'y', which does play double duty.

If it weren't for their stupid, stupid verbs, Spanish would probably be a very simple language to learn.


Related to an above remark about Americans missing nuance of British swear words... since when have swear words had nuance?

Since always. Swear words are usually rife with nuance, possibly more than regular words. A moron and an idiot are not the same thing, despite both denigrating mental capabilities. The same can be said of many other swear words (I once had a very memorable English lesson in which our teacher taught us "the subtle differences between s*** and f***", and when to use one or the other).

Grey Wolf

[Vinyadan]

Does Spanish really have just five vowel sounds? I'm asking, because even Italian actually has seven, in spite of using five letters. (A, closed e, open e, i, closed o, open o, u).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Does Spanish really have just five vowel sounds? I'm asking, because even Italian actually has seven, in spite of using five letters. (A, closed e, open e, i, closed o, open o, u).

Truly only 5. Even the dual 'y' is just the 'i' sound, when used as a vowel.

GW

[Knaight]

If it weren't for their stupid, stupid verbs, Spanish would probably be a very simple language to learn.

Spanish verb conjugation is a mess and pretty brutal to learn, but there's also the matter of the subjunctive and its weirdness. Grammatically it's just so much harder than English.

With that said, English spelling at this point is basically a set of glorified hieroglyphs where the letters are brush strokes, divorced in a large degree from trivial details like pronunciation. I'm willing to call dealing with that worse than anything in Spanish, and that's despite English being my native tongue.

[Tvtyrant]

Spanish verb conjugation is a mess and pretty brutal to learn, but there's also the matter of the subjunctive and its weirdness. Grammatically it's just so much harder than English.

With that said, English spelling at this point is basically a set of glorified hieroglyphs where the letters are brush strokes, divorced in a large degree from trivial details like pronunciation. I'm willing to call dealing with that worse than anything in Spanish, and that's despite English being my native tongue.

Doesn't help that the US was in the middle of making H at the front of words silent when we revolted, and then just left it half finished. Honor, Hamburger, Horrible.

English wouldn't be hard to fix really, it would just take a generation of confusion (like switching to metric).

[Silent Hunter]

Doesn't help that the US was in the middle of making H at the front of words silent when we revolted, and then just left it half finished. Honor, Hamburger, Horrible.

English wouldn't be hard to fix really, it would just take a generation of confusion (like switching to metric).

The Germans haven't managed to get their spelling reform to really stick after 20 years mind...

[Tvtyrant]

The Germans haven't managed to get their spelling reform to really stick after 20 years mind...

Essentially whatever language was in use at the time your country adopts public schools is canon, and you can't retcon it. Standard German takes over in 1800, standard american English in the 1870s, and standard Chinese not until the 1940s. Once you make everyone learn to speak a standard language though, its not going to change easily.

[Vinyadan]

Bat Ay had sac e cul spelin riform in maynd!

[Tvtyrant]

Bat Ay had sac e cul spelin riform in maynd!

An English reform that keeps C? Outrageous.

Personally I think C should be used whenever CH would be, and it's other sounds split into K or S.

X should just give way to Z, and then be used in place of TH (there are far more uses for th than x.)

[Vinyadan]

I actually should have written kul, not cul.

[Aedilred]

Doesn't help that the US was in the middle of making H at the front of words silent when we revolted, and then just left it half finished. Honor, Hamburger, Horrible.

English wouldn't be hard to fix really, it would just take a generation of confusion (like switching to metric).

It would also have a massive impact on our connection with historic literature (including the entire written corpus of English to date) and, if made sufficiently extensive (which would have to be done in order to completely rationalise the notoriously irregular English relationship with phonetics) would render it all but unintelligble save for palaeographers - who are a nearly extinct breed.

Unless the shift were also enacted by a central, global, universally recognised English academy or the like, too, such a reform would have to be undertaken on a national level, which no government has an incentive to do - when your native language is the world's lingua franca, unilaterally altering the spelling to make it totally different from everyone else's is just insane.*

The shift in Chinese characters in the mid-twentieth century was successful on its own terms largely because it was part of a wider programme intended to destroy the connection of the Chinese people with their traditions and heritage. That is, presumably, not something we would consider desirable now. Major spelling initiatives before that generally worked either because there was relatively little standardised spelling previously, and/or because until that point literacy levels (and quantity of printed/written literature) were relatively low, meaning that the new systems formed the basis for a new education rather than a full-scale re-education, something different and considerably more taxing.

As for the comparison to the metric system, that change has caused three generations of confusion in Britain and counting. "A generation of confusion" is optimistic. And messing about with the language would be far more disruptive to our lives than messing about with our system of measurement.

Finally, the inherent problem with making English spelling phonetic is that the variety of dialects and accents mean that it would be impossible to agree on what the "correct" spelling is in any case anyway. What people generally mean is "the written language should reflect the way I talk" - but that way doesn't necessarily reflect the majority pronunciation globally or even locally. That written English enables easy communication between people who speak the same language but sound almost entirely different is a major benefit. Spelling reform in the name of some sort of misguided phonetic consistency when the language itself is phonetically inconsistent would be entirely regressive.

*So, yeah, the Americans have done this once already, which is why they spell a lot of words differently to the rest of the English-speaking world. But they did so on a relatively small scale compared to most modern proposed spelling reforms, they did it relatively early in the history of the printed language, and they also did it at a time when English was still globally a secondary language, so it was slightly less mad than doing it now would be.

[Knaight]

As for the comparison to the metric system, that change has caused three generations of confusion in Britain and counting. "A generation of confusion" is optimistic.

It caused less than one generation of confusion in a lot of other places, which suggests that the phenomenon here is less the inherent difficulty of the change and more British culture being incompetent at adapting to new things. There's also more than a little evidence for the latter elsewhere.

With that said, linguistic change is a much messier process. The metric system was a resounding success, Esperanto and Lojban had such terrible adoption rates that there are more speakers of Quenya and Klingon. An old system of measurement (once rendered internally consistent) can be related to a new one by a fairly short conversion table; changing the spelling of thousands of words isn't so easily done. A generation of confusion is ridiculously optimistic here, whereas for the metric system it's a reasonable expectation that most people are able to meet.

[2D8HP]

It would also have a massive impact on our connection with historic literature (including the entire written corpus of English to date) and.....


Something that struck me the other month when I re-read 1895's The Time Machine (or The Prisoner of Zenda a couple of months before then) is how little the English language has changed in over a hundred years. If you read Robinson Crusoe from 1719 it seems far different from the written English of the 1890's (Arthur Conan Doyle comes to mind) than does late 19th century written English is to current literature.

Similarly, trying to read the language used in contemporary literature seems more like the language used in Shakespeare's Macbeth in the 1623 printing, than Shakespeare is to the English uses in 1485 version of Sir Thomas Malory's Arthur.

Never mind Beowulf!

Seems to me that the English language is changing less as time goes by.

(Speaking of old books, The Canterbury Tales from the 14th century ROCK as does Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight!)


It caused less than one generation of confusion in a lot of other places, which suggests that the phenomenon here is less the inherent difficulty of the change and more British culture being incompetent at adapting to new things.... .


:confused:

I thought that the British have done far more to adopt metric fastee than we have in the USA.

[Knaight]

I thought that the British have done far more to adopt metric fastee than we have in the USA.

I'm certainly not saying that we aren't even worse at adapting, given that we haven't really done so at all outside of science and an entirely too small section of engineering. Still, the vast majority of countries switched over easily, with a handful of holdouts.

[veti]

The shift in Chinese characters in the mid-twentieth century was successful on its own terms largely because it was part of a wider programme intended to destroy the connection of the Chinese people with their traditions and heritage. That is, presumably, not something we would consider desirable now.

I'm not so sure. The kinds of people who try to ban classic books from schools on the grounds of politically incorrect language, for instance - I suspect they might be fine with "destroying the connection with traditional culture and heritage".


As for the comparison to the metric system, that change has caused three generations of confusion in Britain and counting.

The UK's initial adoption of the metric system was half-.. baked, I think is the polite word, and is still not complete to this day. 50 years on - the roads are still marked in miles, beer is sold in pints, land is still measured in acres. For most of my lifetime, milk also continued to be sold in pints, and lots of things were still measured in pounds, even though the weight on the jar was shown in grams. (Which is how I know by heart that there are 568 ml to the pint, and 454 grams to the pound.)

To this day, you'll see greengrocers price vegetables by the pound (with a metric price included only grudgingly as a concession to the law).

Compare with countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand, which didn't pussyfoot around but just - went for it. There's no confusion there. It's really not that hard, it's just the British who made it so.

[Vinyadan]

I think that the greatest benefits of an English spelling reform would be for learners as a foreign language.
I wouldn't be too surprised if e.g. the EU, where English is used as a lingua franca with already some lexical differences with British or American English, issued some memo for internal use. Especially since our old English friends, who, with Ireland and Malta, are the only ones to use English consistently, are leaving (or so they say), European English could become its own thing as a technical language that is no one's mother language.

[Anonymouswizard]

As for the comparison to the metric system, that change has caused three generations of confusion in Britain and counting. "A generation of confusion" is optimistic. And messing about with the language would be far more disruptive to our lives than messing about with our system of measurement.

The problem isn't that we have changed the system, it's that we haven't changed it!

Seriously, depending on who I'm talking to I either have to use metric/SI (my preferred system these days) or Imperial, I can roughly convert between the two (~2.2 pounds to the kilo, an inch is ~2.5cm, a mile is ~1.6km, a pint is only useful when dealing in beer) but I'm just so used to using SI for everything that I actually complain about using miles on roads. Having to switch between the two systems is so annoying that one of my friends declared Imperial measurements the spawn of Chaos.

Plus we still sell milk in pints! I buy every single other liquid by the litre, every solid by the gram or kilo, why do I have to buy milk by the pint!? I don't even buy beer by the pint when it's not in a pub!


:confused:

I thought that the British have done far more to adopt metric fastee than we have in the USA.

It's very much a case of which subset you're talking about. Many in my parent's generation still use obsolete measurements for everything, while in both countries scientists have switched entirely to SI (as have many engineers here). My generation was taught entirely in SI and given basic conversion to Imperial, so many of us default to SI (although I've met some people my age who do use Imperial).

Pretty much the only place everybody uses Imperial measurements is with beer, because going for a pint is just a cornerstone of British culture.

[factotum]

Compare with countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand, which didn't pussyfoot around but just - went for it. There's no confusion there. It's really not that hard, it's just the British who made it so.

To be fair here, the job of conversion wouldn't be so bad for those countries because they're more sparsely populated than the UK and thus don't have the same density of road signs that need updating--and all of the signs would need to be updated to show both metric and imperial units, because you're not going to be able to do them all overnight one day.

Plus you'd get some idiot who got himself killed by driving 110mph on the motorway and some Daily Mail article would blame it all on the new road signs...

[Aedilred]

The UK's initial adoption of the metric system was half-.. baked, I think is the polite word, and is still not complete to this day. 50 years on - the roads are still marked in miles, beer is sold in pints, land is still measured in acres. For most of my lifetime, milk also continued to be sold in pints, and lots of things were still measured in pounds, even though the weight on the jar was shown in grams. (Which is how I know by heart that there are 568 ml to the pint, and 454 grams to the pound.)

To this day, you'll see greengrocers price vegetables by the pound (with a metric price included only grudgingly as a concession to the law).

Compare with countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand, which didn't pussyfoot around but just - went for it. There's no confusion there. It's really not that hard, it's just the British who made it so.
And you don't think exactly the same thing would happen, except moreso, when it came to spelling reform?


I think that the greatest benefits of an English spelling reform would be for learners as a foreign language.
I wouldn't be too surprised if e.g. the EU, where English is used as a lingua franca with already some lexical differences with British or American English, issued some memo for internal use. Especially since our old English friends, who, with Ireland and Malta, are the only ones to use English consistently, are leaving (or so they say), European English could become its own thing as a technical language that is no one's mother language.
This doesn't seem particularly sensible. It might make written English easier to learn within the EU, but it would make it harder to use to communicate with anyone who speaks English outside the EU (i.e. the overwhelming majority of English-speakers, post-Brexit) and also the only real point to learning English as a foreign language anyway. It'd be more useful to switch to using French, Spanish or German as the EU's principal language, and probably less effort.

[Murk]

This doesn't seem particularly sensible. It might make written English easier to learn within the EU, but it would make it harder to use to communicate with anyone who speaks English outside the EU (i.e. the overwhelming majority of English-speakers, post-Brexit) and also the only real point to learning English as a foreign language anyway. It'd be more useful to switch to using French, Spanish or German as the EU's principal language, and probably less effort.

Not sure about this. For me English is almost a first language, because I heard it from the day I was born through television, music, video games, advertisements, books, the internet, etc. It is not officially a first language in my country, but none of the children that are born now will have to learn their first words in school - by the time they go to school they already speak full sentences of English.
The same goes for a large number of EU-countries.

English as an international language isn't just because we want to speak with people that only speak English: it is also because we can be certain everyone knows a few words of it (compare that to French or German, which I only had a few years of bad school education, or Spanish, which I know maybe three or four words of).

In a few years, the EU will be filled with people who know and speak English. Switching to German or French as an internal language would mean that everyone who wants to get involved will need to learn that language, whereas they already speak English (and so will their children and grandchildren, as long as Hollywood keeps on churning out movies).

[Vinyadan]

On second thought, a huge vowel shift in pronunciation of UE English would be more likely (and sensible) than graphic changes. It probably is already happening. It has many advantages over a graphic reform: English has a rather traditional spelling, which allows for easy reading by Neo-Latin speakers, especially compared to the current pronunciation (see stuff like Ocean vs "Oshon", fashion vs "feshon", coherence vs "kowhir'ns".) The vowel pronunciation would be common to many large countries, like Germany, Italy and Spain, and probably many others with a smaller population, like Finland. The English world Corpus would remain readable. The more or less democratic way in which UE representatives are elected for the Parliament means that there isn't a large care for excellence in preparation, like there normally is for diplomats sent abroad, so an easier pronunciation would be easily accessible.
I think that the determining factor for such a change would be the ability of UE representatives and bureaucrats to form a tight enough community to influence each other's way of speaking. In this case, it could be a natural, if slow and likely destined to have many special cases, development.

[veti]

To be fair here, the job of conversion wouldn't be so bad for those countries because they're more sparsely populated than the UK and thus don't have the same density of road signs that need updating--and all of the signs would need to be updated to show both metric and imperial units, because you're not going to be able to do them all overnight one day.

Plus you'd get some idiot who got himself killed by driving 110mph on the motorway and some Daily Mail article would blame it all on the new road signs...

It's true that there are a really astonishing number of road signs in Britain. But if you just replaced them in routine maintenance, it could all be done in five years. It's been *fifty*, now, since Britain allegedly made the decision to do this thing.

The tabloids would do what they do, sure. But they'll do that anyway. Seriously, if "the Daily Mail would complain" is the strongest argument against something, then you don't really have an argument.


And you don't think exactly the same thing would happen, except moreso, when it came to spelling reform?

Oh good heavens yes, any serious attempt at spelling reform would be a disaster of Biblical proportions. The major difference is that metrication was only a minor - inconvenience, because it was in itself not a bad idea. Whereas the kind of spelling reform people usually talk about - is an irretrievably boneheaded idea with not so much as a hint of a suggestion of any kind of redeeming virtue whatsoever.

[Knaight]

Oh good heavens yes, any serious attempt at spelling reform would be a disaster of Biblical proportions. The major difference is that metrication was only a minor - inconvenience, because it was in itself not a bad idea. Whereas the kind of spelling reform people usually talk about - is an irretrievably boneheaded idea with not so much as a hint of a suggestion of any kind of redeeming virtue whatsoever.

Exactly. The conversion is much harder, and much less is gained by doing it. There's also the matter of who benefits. With metrification the people who actually use units routinely beyond just distance, temperature, area, volume, and occasionally pressure benefit the most, then the rest of society benefits from their work. With a spelling change it screws over linguists and literature specialists the most.

Mildly inconveniencing the populace occasionally so that the smaller group of people who use units in extensive calculations for hours every day don't have stupid hurdles to deal with is entirely reasonable. Severely inconveniencing the populace all the time to make things worse for the specialists, not so much.

[2D8HP]

The only way that I could see written English soelling reform is if a very large population who is learning English demands it.

I could imagine say India doing it, to make Indian-English a "lingua franca" of the sub-continent, but otherwise world wide there may be more readers of English than speakers, and wanting to read what's already written is a motive for learning it, whereas reformed-spelling-English would only be useful for new and translated works.

It could happen though, how many centuries was Latin used for writing when the spoken "common"/"vulgar" language was different?

[factotum]

It could happen though, how many centuries was Latin used for writing when the spoken "common"/"vulgar" language was different?

That happened because most people couldn't write, though. The ones who *could* tended to be religious types like priests and monks, who wrote using Latin because that was the language of the Church. Nowadays most people can write, so the situation isn't analogous.

[Vinyadan]

@Knaight

I think it would actually just create a new kind of specialist. Kind of like how paleography and epigraphic require special skills, so that the poor widdle linguists can understand what's written, and so the linguist can explain to the cute widdle helpless literature scholars what the words in the text mean.

Not optimal, but not devastating. Academia is meant for this sort of things, through division of competence among different specialists. It would however screw over the common people really bad.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

That happened because most people couldn't write, though. The ones who *could* tended to be religious types like priests and monks, who wrote using Latin because that was the language of the Church. Nowadays most people can write, so the situation isn't analogous.

Err... vulgar latin started to diverge from formal latin long before the Christian church became the dominant Roman church. It is likely it started to diverge before the Roman Empire itself - I seem to recall Seneca complaining about it, and he is from the last years of the Republic.

GW

[Vinyadan]

Seneca the famous one is actually fully Imperial. Seneca Maior, his father, was born 23 years before Actium and Augustus becoming sole ruler. But some divergence was always there, without a doubt: Appius Claudius Caecus wanted to annull rotacism (lases vs lares, ausosa vs aurora), while Cicero derided a guy who pronounced Marcaellus as Marcellus. This however was more a reaction to change by Appius and derision of a guy with a country accent by Cicero. Anyhow, the divergence between vulgar and classical Latin must have started around year 1AD, give or take some 50 years. The fun fact is that the origin of many innovations was Rome, because of a matter of prestige of the language spoken in the capital. So you find many changes in vocabulary in regions closer to Rome that did not happen in areas further removed: the typical example is classical magis, from which Spanish mas comes, that in Italian and French was substituted by the more recent plus.
You can see such a process in Greek, too: compare katharousa vs demothiki.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: This thread is problematic all over the place. Excessive profanity is prohibited on this forum (and seems to have been avoided here), but this thread involves some things plainly prohibited by the Forum Rules (like discussing real world religion and politics or circumventing the forum filters with symbols, acronyms/initialisms or in other ways.)