Big Brother BrE
MC
Out of idle curiosity I started watching Big Brother UK and have become
hooked, not least because of the way the inmates speak BrE, innit.
I really don't believe anyone spoke BrE like this when I lived there. Of
course there were buzzwords and catchphrases, but this brand of
yoofspeak patois is like a whole different language, a kind of pidgin
English.
How common* is it?
*As in how frequently do you hear it, not "how common!"?
--
"I tried being reasonable. I didn't like it."
- Clint Eastwood
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
>I'm a British expat who has lived in Canada since 1972.
>
>Out of idle curiosity I started watching Big Brother UK and have become
>hooked, not least because of the way the inmates speak BrE, innit.
>
>I really don't believe anyone spoke BrE like this when I lived there. Of
>course there were buzzwords and catchphrases, but this brand of
>yoofspeak patois is like a whole different language, a kind of pidgin
>English.
>
That is an interesting question.
Several of the HMs (housemates) were born outside the UK and have
English as a second language. Cairon was born in England but brought up
in the southern US.
The native English speakers come from various parts of Britain, and one
from Ireland, and have a variety of regional accents.
>How common* is it?
>
>*As in how frequently do you hear it, not "how common!"?
It's difficult to put a figure on that. I'll just say that when I first
heard them speak I didn't detect anything particularly unusual about the
way they were speaking. It's not the case that everyone speaks like that
but it's not uncommon.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Don Phillipson
news:copespaz-6FCAD9...@mara100-84.onlink.net...
> I'm a British expat who has lived in Canada since 1972.
>
> Out of idle curiosity I started watching Big Brother UK and have become
> hooked, not least because of the way the inmates speak BrE, innit.
>
> I really don't believe anyone spoke BrE like this when I lived there. Of
> course there were buzzwords and catchphrases, but this brand of
> yoofspeak patois is like a whole different language, a kind of pidgin
> English.
Consider the changes . . .
Up to the 1960s the main influences on language were:
1. More than a dozen ancient local accents and dialects
(e.g. London, West Country, Yorkshire, Scotland, etc.)
Most children grew up within a single language milieu:
but all boys encountered others when conscripted at
18 for 2 years military service.
2. BBC Radio which was deliberately oriented towards
RSP or "BBC English," maintained by a special committe
of linguistic arbiters.
2b. "Standard English" was reinforced by most schools,
which taught standard grammar (but rarely opposed
dominant local accents in speech.)
3. Hollywood films offered several varieties of American
English, all recognizably foreign.
Since the 1980s the norms of #2 have changed. The
BBC is no longer governed by "BBC English" and other
broadcasters offer a wider range of accent and perhaps
grammar. RSP is widely deplored by some people as
ipso facto either conservative or snobbish. Simultaneously
schools have changed their emphases on language,
notably teaching less grammar than formerly.
Britain has changed demographically by immigration
and the (globalized) mass media present a much larger
range of Englishes, e.g. including American "Black English,"
Indian, Jamaican and so on. Conscription has ended, so
that 18-year-olds are no longer relocated alone into a large
unfamiliar community that speaks in a variety of unfamiliar
regional accents.
My conjecture is that the linguistic milieu of Young England
has thus changed from multicoloured (kaleidoscopic)
towards the blended. As I recall the 1950s, the regional
accents heard during military service and the Hollywood
voices from the screen and the plummy BBC accent
from the radio did not blend and did not cause young
airmen from London, Scotland or Devon to speak much
differently from the way their parents spoke.
There are today just as many different linguistic
influences, probably more, and the walls separating
the familiar from the foreign have cracked (and in some
respects been deliberately dismantled, cf. the abolition
of grammar schools.) This means that the young
Briton no longer categorizes the Edward Heath/Margaret
Thatcher voices as "foreign" in social class, or the
voices of Hollywood entertainers as geographically
foreign. They sort of blend -- in a way that did not
happen in National Service training camps of the 1960s.
It seems like mixing paints. We used to live in a Seurat
world, of many differing brilliant spots, that we distinguished
up close however they appeared to blend when we stood
back: but if we pour all the paints into a single pot and stir, the
single resulting colour is monochrome and monotonous.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
MC
"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
Thanks for this thoughtful post.
Robin Bignall
I haven't seen the programme, but I imagine Matthew is hearing some
form of glottal stop, which has spread from the eastern part of Essex
and East London into a great deal of the younger generation of the
southern half of England. Even ex-PM Blair used it when he wanted to
sound like the common folk. To some of us with dialects that don't
contain the stop it sticks out like a sore thumb and sounds sloppy.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
MC
Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I haven't seen the programme, but I imagine Matthew is hearing some
> form of glottal stop, which has spread from the eastern part of Essex
> and East London into a great deal of the younger generation of the
> southern half of England. Even ex-PM Blair used it when he wanted to
> sound like the common folk. To some of us with dialects that don't
> contain the stop it sticks out like a sore thumb and sounds sloppy.
That's not what I'm talking about at all. I'm quite used to the glo-ul
stop.
The programme is a massive waste of time, but... it does demonstrate a
form of English as she is spoke quite widely, and it reveals some
attitudes that I find unexpected. Think of it as a cultural/linguistic
Petri dish and it's worth a look and a listen.
Nick
> I haven't seen the programme, but I imagine Matthew is hearing some
> form of glottal stop, which has spread from the eastern part of Essex
> and East London into a great deal of the younger generation of the
> southern half of England. Even ex-PM Blair used it when he wanted to
> sound like the common folk. To some of us with dialects that don't
> contain the stop it sticks out like a sore thumb and sounds sloppy.
At my most curmudgeonly I think the glottal stop is shortly to replace
almost all consonants.
"Is it like?" comes out as "i'i'liiii'?"
--
Online waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk
development version: http://canalplan.eu
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>At my most curmudgeonly I think the glottal stop is shortly to replace
>almost all consonants.
>
>"Is it like?" comes out as "i'i'liiii'?"
When I worked for London Transport I said "Eh?" about five times to a bus
inspector who said "Aw' ee' o'"
Eventually I understood him to mean "Since you are running late, turn around
at Thornton Heath Pond instead of going on to Croydon".
Even I said "Thorneath Pond" when I was in a hurry, but his utterance was a
bit too much shorthand.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Tom P
> I'm a British expat who has lived in Canada since 1972.
>
> Out of idle curiosity I started watching Big Brother UK and have become
> hooked, not least because of the way the inmates speak BrE, innit.
>
> I really don't believe anyone spoke BrE like this when I lived there. Of
> course there were buzzwords and catchphrases, but this brand of
> yoofspeak patois is like a whole different language, a kind of pidgin
> English.
>
> How common* is it?
>
> *As in how frequently do you hear it, not "how common!"?
>
Like you I'm an ex-patriot, now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
As I have never seen the UK version, your post prompted me to check some
Youtube Big Brother episodes. I must say the English was not as bad as I
was expecting, but even though I originally come from the East London
area, I find Estuary English very ugly.
T.
MC
Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
> Like you I'm an ex-patriot, now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
> As I have never seen the UK version, your post prompted me to check some
> Youtube Big Brother episodes. I must say the English was not as bad as I
> was expecting, but even though I originally come from the East London
> area, I find Estuary English very ugly.
It's not only Estuary English, however. There's a woman from Birmingham,
another from Ireland and a guy from somewhere up North - I think
Newcastle, plus an Iranian Londoner, a black guy who grew up in the
states who seems to have absorbed US Ebonics and overlaid it with
Chavspeak, and an Indian whose command of English is occasionally quite
fluent and occasionally completely off the rails, plus a "toff" with (to
my ears) a very odd amalgam of upper class drawl and streetspeak. The
one Londoner (Marcus) is quite articulate. The toff speaks well enough
but 90% of what he says is nonsense.
And it's not just the accents, it's the whole way of communicating -
vocabulary, habits, cadences, little fillers like "at the end of the
day" and "innit" spattered about, plus blank incomprehension of certain
words. And yet... they all seem to understand each other perfectly well
without any kind of interpretation needed.
And then there's the very strange (to my eyes) casual acceptance and
seeming anticipation of bisexuality as the *norm*. There are endless
discussions about who fancies whom, and as far as I can see the only out
lesbian isn't on the prowl, but everyone else is, and they don't care
which sex they get.
I am, I admit, hooked on this rubbish, but from an
anthropological/sociological point of view. I can say that with some
confidence since I really don't give a dman who wins.
Mark Brader
> When I worked for London Transport I said "Eh?" about five times to a bus
> inspector who said "Aw' ee' o'"
>
> Eventually I understood him to mean "Since you are running late, turn around
> at Thornton Heath Pond instead of going on to Croydon".
>
> Even I said "Thorneath Pond" when I was in a hurry, but his utterance was a
> bit too much shorthand.
When I moved to what is now Toronto in the 1970s, many bus drivers
would call out the major stops on their routes, and most streetcar
drivers called out all stops, in a style that I came to describe as
"Omit all consonants before the accented vowel and all vowels after".
The day I knew I had settled in as a resident was when I took the
60 Steeles West bus as far as Dufferin for the first time, heard the
driver shout "Uffrn", and did not need to think about it before ringing
the bell to get off.
--
Mark Brader | Peter Neumann on Y2K:
Toronto | This problem gives new meaning to "going out on
m...@vex.net | a date" (which many systems will do on 1/1/00).
My text in this article is in the public domain.
MC
m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
> When I moved to what is now Toronto in the 1970s, many bus drivers
> would call out the major stops on their routes, and most streetcar
> drivers called out all stops, in a style that I came to describe as
> "Omit all consonants before the accented vowel and all vowels after".
>
> The day I knew I had settled in as a resident was when I took the
> 60 Steeles West bus as far as Dufferin for the first time, heard the
> driver shout "Uffrn", and did not need to think about it before ringing
> the bell to get off.
When I moved to Montreal most bus drivers called out major stops too.
They seem to have given up now, but the famous utterance was for Rue
Guy/Guy Street which came out as one word: "roogheeguystreet"
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
>
>And then there's the very strange (to my eyes) casual acceptance and
>seeming anticipation of bisexuality as the *norm*. There are endless
>discussions about who fancies whom, and as far as I can see the only out
>lesbian isn't on the prowl, but everyone else is, and they don't care
>which sex they get.
I haven't been able to work out how much of that is real and how much is
just talk to keep in with the crowd. Has the "casual acceptance and
seeming anticipation of bisexuality" simply become a conversational norm
rather than a true reflection of the attitudes and preferences of
individuals?
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
>
>And then there's the very strange (to my eyes) casual acceptance and
>seeming anticipation of bisexuality as the *norm*. There are endless
>discussions about who fancies whom, and as far as I can see the only out
>lesbian isn't on the prowl, but everyone else is, and they don't care
>which sex they get.
>
We are drifting way off topic here!
I've just read this in a forum:
From: �nima
Quote:
Originally Posted by halfbloodprince
Is bisexuality the new black? We all know BB HM (housemates) are the
most opportunistic bunch your liable to meet who exaggerate thier
lifestyles 1000% to get past the auditions and on to the show. Do we
really believe Freddie has had male lovers or was this just to make
him appear more interesting. Faux lesbian kisses aplenty in past BB
especially with spin the bottle. There is no doubt Lisa will trying
to prove her boast that she can 'turn' one of the HM. As the show
gets more competitive no doubt 'all bets are off' in the desperation
to stay on the show and promises of sexual behaviour is what the
show and Daily Star want.
Endquote.
False claims of bisexuality are rife in my experience so I agree.
Often it's just a way of attention whoring. Some girls also like to
pretend, because they think it turns men on.
It does seem odd that so many are either gay or bisexual. Only a
small percentage of the population is gay or bisexual, yet it seems
more than half of the housemates are!
Either the type that apply for BB are extreme attention seekers who
will even pretend to be gay to get attention- or BB purposely picks
them. Probably a bit of both.
The thread is "Are you an 'all bets off' bisexual after a few drinks?"
at:
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=1050128
Mark Brader
> > I'm a British expat who has lived in Canada since 1972.
Tom P.:
> Like you I'm an ex-patriot, now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
Matthew said he was an expat, not an ex-patriot.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "I wish to God these calculations had been
m...@vex.net | executed by steam!" -- Charles Babbage, 1821
Mike Lyle
> Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> writes:
>
>> I haven't seen the programme, but I imagine Matthew is hearing some
>> form of glottal stop, which has spread from the eastern part of Essex
>> and East London into a great deal of the younger generation of the
>> southern half of England. Even ex-PM Blair used it when he wanted to
>> sound like the common folk. To some of us with dialects that don't
>> contain the stop it sticks out like a sore thumb and sounds sloppy.
>
> At my most curmudgeonly I think the glottal stop is shortly to replace
> almost all consonants.
>
> "Is it like?" comes out as "i'i'liiii'?"
I've been fascinated for some time by one of the sports anchors on
Al-Jazeera. She's Chinese, I think, and I've finally analyzed why her
speech is intelligible but bizarre: she reckons consonants followed by
other consonants are silent; at the same time, she can only just
distinguish l and r. "Wo Cu fooba." Glottal stops would actually make
her speech clearer.
--
Mike.
Garrett Wollman
> It does seem odd that so many are either gay or bisexual. Only a
> small percentage of the population is gay or bisexual,
I wonder what evidence the (webforum) writer has for this. He/she/it
seems to assume a discrete classification of individuals that is not
supported by the evidence of history or modern society. (Repeat after
me: "'Sexual orientation' is an invention of modern Western European
culture.")
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
wol...@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
Steve Hayes
>Like you I'm an ex-patriot, now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
>As I have never seen the UK version, your post prompted me to check some
>Youtube Big Brother episodes. I must say the English was not as bad as I
>was expecting, but even though I originally come from the East London
>area, I find Estuary English very ugly.
Does that mean you're a renegade?
Robert Lieblich
>
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:40:25 +0200, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>
> >Like you I'm an ex-patriot,
OY!
> >now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
> >As I have never seen the UK version, your post prompted me to check some
> >Youtube Big Brother episodes. I must say the English was not as bad as I
> >was expecting, but even though I originally come from the East London
> >area, I find Estuary English very ugly.
[ ... ]
James Hogg
>Steve Hayes wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:40:25 +0200, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>>
>> >Like you I'm an ex-patriot,
>
>OY!
What's wrong? The more people who abandon patriotism, the better.
--
James
Garrett Wollman
James Hogg <Jas....@gOUTmail.com> wrote:
>What's wrong? The more people who abandon patriotism, the better.
Clearly the bizarre British meaning of "patriotism" at work here....
Nick Spalding
on Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:33:29 +0000 (UTC):
> In article <7tth359lkfe7s7vgt...@4ax.com>,
> James Hogg <Jas....@gOUTmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What's wrong? The more people who abandon patriotism, the better.
>
> Clearly the bizarre British meaning of "patriotism" at work here....
As defined by Dr. Johnson.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Ildhund
> James Hogg wrote:
>
>>What's wrong? The more people who abandon patriotism, the better.
>
> Clearly the bizarre British meaning of "patriotism" at work
> here....
Sorry, Garrett, this Brit doesn't know what you're getting at. Which
particular peculiarly British meaning of "patriot" do you regard as
bizarre? Why? And how does it differ from 'your' idea of a patriot?
--
Noel
Garrett Wollman
Ildhund <jn...@removemsn.com> wrote:
>Sorry, Garrett, this Brit doesn't know what you're getting at. Which
>particular peculiarly British meaning of "patriot" do you regard as
>bizarre?
The one in which patriotism is considered a vice rather than a virtue.
Robin Bignall
(Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>In article <h1bab5$5r0$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>Ildhund <jn...@removemsn.com> wrote:
>
>>Sorry, Garrett, this Brit doesn't know what you're getting at. Which
>>particular peculiarly British meaning of "patriot" do you regard as
>>bizarre?
>
>The one in which patriotism is considered a vice rather than a virtue.
>
Johnson thought it's the last refuge of a scoundrel, and I don't
disagree.
Ildhund
> Ildhund wrote:
> Clearly the bizarre British meaning of "patriotism" at work
> here....
>>Sorry, Garrett, this Brit doesn't know what you're getting at.
>>Which particular peculiarly British meaning of "patriot" do you
>>regard as bizarre?
>
> The one in which patriotism is considered a vice rather than a
> virtue.
OED (Draft revision June 2009 - couldn't be more � jour):[1]
"*1.d.* /U.S./ Freq. with capital initial. An opponent of presumed
intervention by federal government in the affairs of individuals,
esp. with respect to gun and tax laws. Freq. in the names of
right-wing libertarian political and militia groups."
and its supporting quotation:
"*1995* /Denver Post/ 22 Jan. A1/3 The FBI is concerned with those
patriots who promote violence and racial discord."
So you're saying that British patriots are vicious because Dr
Johnson said so and many agreed with him in the early part of C18,
but American ones who "promote violence and racial discord" are
virtuous? I think the Atlantic must be widening faster than 1m/hyr.
[1] There is an extraneous comma in definition 1.b. At least, I
couldn't make sense of it. How does one draw attention to such
things?
--
Noel
Mike Lyle
> In article <ak1g3511uc26a46o1...@4ax.com>,
> Peter Duncanson (BrE) <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>> I've just read this in a forum:
>
>> It does seem odd that so many are either gay or bisexual. Only a
>> small percentage of the population is gay or bisexual,
>
> I wonder what evidence the (webforum) writer has for this. He/she/it
> seems to assume a discrete classification of individuals that is not
> supported by the evidence of history or modern society. (Repeat after
> me: "'Sexual orientation' is an invention of modern Western European
> culture.")
>
--
Mike.
Mike Lyle
We are sometimes led to suppose that an American thinks patriotism is
placing one's country before other countries; I think patriotism is
placing one's country before oneself. The former is the kind we need to
abandon as soon as possible, if not sooner: the latter deserves to be
treated with a degree of scepticism, too.
--
Mike.
Richard Bollard
That doesn't necessarily mean that it's a Bad Thing. Just because
scoundrels end up there doesn't make it a bad place in itself
(although the company could be better).
I always thought that patriotism was barracking for your country in
sport. All the other stuff is too nuanced to be black and white on.
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia
To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
Evan Kirshenbaum
I don't either, but I fail to see why that implies that there's
anything wrong with it. I note, for example, that Usenet is the
frequent dwelling place of the crackpot and the crank.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The vast majority of humans have
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |more than the average number of
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |legs.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Evan Kirshenbaum
I don't think it's placing one's country before other countries so
much as identifying in a familial way with one's country and believing
that it's worth defending and preserving. It doesn't mean wanting
everybody to be American, but it does mean having a preference that
America not become part of France or Germany, however much you may
also like those countries. It doesn't mean not appreciating British
holidays, but it means considering Thanskgiving and the Fourth of July
"yours". It doesn't mean blindly agreeing with everything your
government does, but it does often mean taking umbrage ignorantly make
fun of your country just because you do things differently.
I personally don't see anything wrong with it.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Feeling good about government is like
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |looking on the bright side of any
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |catastrophe. When you quit looking
|on the bright side, the catastrophe
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |is still there.
(650)857-7572 | P.J. O'Rourke
Mark Brader
> ...but it does often mean taking umbrage ignorantly make
> fun of your country just because you do things differently.
>
> I personally don't see anything wrong with it.
I personally see something wrong there. Grammatically, that is.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, m...@vex.net | "...but I could be wromg." --Rodney Boyd
Mark Brader
> I personally see something wrong there. Grammatically, that is.
Sorry, I meant to email that, not post it.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "More importantly, Mark is just plain wrong."
m...@vex.net -- John Hollingsworth
Garrett Wollman
Ildhund <jn...@removemsn.com> wrote:
>OED (Draft revision June 2009 - couldn't be more \340 jour):[1]
>"*1.d.* /U.S./ Freq. with capital initial. An opponent of presumed
>intervention by federal government in the affairs of individuals,
>esp. with respect to gun and tax laws. Freq. in the names of
>right-wing libertarian political and militia groups."
>and its supporting quotation:
>"*1995* /Denver Post/ 22 Jan. A1/3 The FBI is concerned with those
>patriots who promote violence and racial discord."
>
>So you're saying that British patriots are vicious because Dr
>Johnson said so and many agreed with him in the early part of C18,
>but American ones who "promote violence and racial discord" are
>virtuous?
No, I think the OED is wrong, or at least biased). That is a
reasonable definition of "so-called 'patriot'" (in scare quotes); it's
not remotely related to what most Americans would understand "patriot"
to mean. Most Americans are not members of the right-wing lunatic
fringe.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Evan Kirshenbaum writes:
>> ...but it does often mean taking umbrage ignorantly make
>> fun of your country just because you do things differently.
>>
>> I personally don't see anything wrong with it.
>
> I personally see something wrong there. Grammatically, that is.
Imagine I had typed "when people" after "umbrage".
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Any programming problem can be
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |solved by adding another layer of
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |indirection. Any performance
|problem can be solved by removing
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |one.
(650)857-7572
Steve Hayes
Wollman) wrote:
>In article <ak1g3511uc26a46o1...@4ax.com>,
>Peter Duncanson (BrE) <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>>I've just read this in a forum:
>
>> It does seem odd that so many are either gay or bisexual. Only a
>> small percentage of the population is gay or bisexual,
>
>I wonder what evidence the (webforum) writer has for this. He/she/it
>seems to assume a discrete classification of individuals that is not
>supported by the evidence of history or modern society. (Repeat after
>me: "'Sexual orientation' is an invention of modern Western European
>culture.")
Is there a genealogy of that idea?
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:54:47 +0000 (UTC), wol...@bimajority.org
But did he mean by that that all patriots are ipso facto scoundrels?
Bob Martin
>On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:18:04 +0100, Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:54:47 +0000 (UTC), wol...@bimajority.org
>>(Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <h1bab5$5r0$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>Ildhund <jn...@removemsn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Sorry, Garrett, this Brit doesn't know what you're getting at. Which
>>>>particular peculiarly British meaning of "patriot" do you regard as
>>>>bizarre?
>>>
>>>The one in which patriotism is considered a vice rather than a virtue.
>>>
>>Johnson thought it's the last refuge of a scoundrel, and I don't
>>disagree.
>
>But did he mean by that that all patriots are ipso facto scoundrels?
No, he was talking about scoundrels, not patriots.
the Omrud
It's my understanding that Johnson was giving a characteristic of
scoundrels, rather than of patriotism. That is, he's saying that
scoundrels find refuge in patriotism, rather than that every patriot is
a scoundrel.
--
David
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>[1] There is an extraneous comma in definition 1.b. At least, I
>couldn't make sense of it. How does one draw attention to such
>things?
Once you have convinced yourself there is an error you can inform the
OED editors by email: oe...@oup.com or post.
See:
http://dictionary.oed.com/readers/research.html
That page asks for new information about words: new words, new senses,
earlier quotations, and the like.
I imagine that they would accepted comments on misleading punctuation in
a dictionary entry.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Ildhund
> Ildhund wrote:
>
>>[1] There is an extraneous comma in definition 1.b. At least, I
>>couldn't make sense of it. How does one draw attention to such
>>things?
>
> Once you have convinced yourself there is an error you can inform
> the OED editors by email: oe...@oup.com or post. See:
> http://dictionary.oed.com/readers/research.html
>
http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/support/
which allows for comments on content.
Do you think I'll get house points?
--
Noel
Mike Barnes
Nor do I see anything wrong with it in the terms you use. But although
none of the things that you list could be regarded as wrong
individually, taken as a group they can seem unattractive especially
when applied inappropriately or to excess, or to the detriment of wider
concern for mankind (am I still allowed to use that term?) as a whole.
There's no doubt that some people do carry patriotism to excess. The USA
is near the top of the world rankings for patriotism. Some might say
that's because you've got a lot to be proud of, others might take a less
kindly view.
Some considerations apply specifically to the UK, which is the country
that started this sub-thread. First, we have complex overlapping nations
(UK, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) so an unqualified
reference to patriotism is ambiguous, limiting the term's usefulness.
Second, the word "patriot" and its derivatives have to a large extent
been hijacked by xenophobic (anti-Europe or anti-immigrant or both)
organisations. So "patriotic" increasingly carries strong overtones of
"bigoted". I guess these are the aspects that Garrett Wollman might have
been referring to when he wrote of "the bizarre British meaning".
--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England
Ildhund
> Some considerations apply specifically to the UK [...]
> [T]he word "patriot" and its derivatives have to a large extent
> been hijacked by xenophobic (anti-Europe or anti-immigrant or
> both) organisations. So "patriotic" increasingly carries strong
> overtones of "bigoted". I guess these are the aspects that Garrett
> Wollman might have been referring to when he wrote of "the bizarre
> British meaning".
Thank you, Mike, for making that clear. I readily admit that my
knowledge of modern English usage is deficient; returning to England
a couple of years ago after living abroad for 35 years made me feel
like a time traveller. During my absence, I had next to no contact
with the old country and much seems to have changed language-wise,
even in the delightfully arch-conservative rural enclave populated
by retired judges, generals and bishops where I now live. I was
until this morning completely unaware of the nuance you describe,
and I quite understand how Garrett might describe it as bizarre. My
apologies for snapping at him.
It's interesting, though, that although the same phenomenon appears
to have happened over there, "patriot" can still be used with its
'normal' meaning. Why is this not the case over here?
--
Noel
...who hasn't yet got used to using Christian names only for total
strangers and feels a bit cheeky when doing so.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
I think "content" means the content of the website rather than the
content of the OED itself.
pdpi
I rather fancy Shaw's take on patriotism, stating that "Patriotism is
your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries
because you were born in it."
I fail to see the point of patriotism. Or, rather, I can see a limited
point, which is the desire to preserve the culture with which one
identifies himself, but that's no more valid for a whole country
(whence the etymology) than it is for a region within a country, or
even spanning more than one country. Inversely, preserving one's
culture does not, in any way, imply turning your back to any other
culture. In fact, you can only fully appreciate your culture when you
can compare it others -- much in the way that much discussion in this
newsgroup sheds light on the differences between English dialects.
Ildhund
> I fail to see the point of patriotism. Or, rather, I can see a
> limited point, which is the desire to preserve the culture with
> which one identifies himself,
Oy!
[One of those things that gets up my hackles]
--
Noel
Evan Kirshenbaum
Once it is up your hackles, what do you do with it?
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Oh, forget it: I can't write about
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |this anymore until I find a much
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |more sarcastic typeface.
| Bill Bickel
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
CDB
>>> I fail to see the point of patriotism. Or, rather, I can see a
>>> limited point, which is the desire to preserve the culture with
>>> which one identifies himself,
>> Oy!
>> [One of those things that gets up my hackles]
Standard US version, though.
> Once it is up your hackles, what do you do with it?
The hakka, presumably. Cleans out the sinuses too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPKUjAFkIig
(US version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmM7QeoCP1Y&feature=related
(original hairy-man version, avec des sous-titres)
Tom P
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:40:25 +0200, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>
>> Like you I'm an ex-patriot, now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
>> As I have never seen the UK version, your post prompted me to check some
>> Youtube Big Brother episodes. I must say the English was not as bad as I
>> was expecting, but even though I originally come from the East London
>> area, I find Estuary English very ugly.
>
> Does that mean you're a renegade?
>
>
lol -that was a Freudian slip <g>.
Come to think about it, I haven't been very patriotic since the time I
left the country.
Ildhund
> Ildhund wrote:
>>Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote...
>>> Ildhund wrote:
>>>
>>>>[1] There is an extraneous comma in definition 1.b. At least, I
>>>>couldn't make sense of it. How does one draw attention to such
>>>>things?
>>>
>>> Once you have convinced yourself there is an error you can
>>> inform the OED editors by email: oe...@oup.com or post. See:
>>> http://dictionary.oed.com/readers/research.html
>>>
>>Thank you. I found an e-form at
>>http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/support/
>>which allows for comments on content.
>>Do you think I'll get house points?
>
> I think "content" means the content of the website rather than the
> content of the OED itself.
Having received an acknowledgement of my submission, I went back to
the Contact page at
http://dictionary.oed.com/general/contacts.html
There at its foot is written:
<quote>
The OED welcomes academic feedback on its editorial content. For
this and all other enquiries, please use our support form.
</quote>
This support form is the e-form I referred to above. So now we know.
How do you suppose they define 'academic feedback'?
--
Noel
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
You are a mature non-feepaying student at the Alternative University of
English, and occasional tutor. That should be good enough for the OED.
Robert Bannister
> Most Americans are not members of the right-wing lunatic
> fringe.
When I read this group, your statement is self-evident; when I read
r.a.s.written, however, I get the opposite impression. And then there
are talk-back radio shows, where I get the feeling everyone everywhere
is a right-wing lunatic.
--
Rob Bannister
Steve Hayes
wrote:
I second that.
While this group indicates that there are sane people holding a variety of
political opinions in the USA, some others give the impression that it is
populated entirely by right-wing fanatics -- the scoundrels Dr Johnson
referred to, who use patrioism as a refuge.
Steve Hayes
Mine too.
Steve Hayes
From the ensuing dicussion it would seem that "patriot" is now an epithet
reserved for neo-fascist right-wing xenophobes, so it's probably not a bad
thing.
It appears that the change in meaning has been brought about by the said
neo-fascist right-wing xenophobes using the term "patriot" as a
self-description.
Though when it comes to Britain, I think some political re-education is
needed, as ignorance abounds -- see:
http://methodius.blogspot.com/2009/06/britain-swings-to-rift-er-leght.html
pdpi
Mine three. I beg forgiveness for the pain inflicted in such a vile
manner.
pdpi
> From the ensuing dicussion it would seem that "patriot" is now an epithet
> reserved for neo-fascist right-wing xenophobes, so it's probably not a bad
> thing.
And if sharing an epithet with "neo-fascist right-wing xenophobes"
isn't bad enough, you'd share it with a missile as well..
Steve Hayes
I saw a Jeep station wagon sporting the name "Renegade" the other day.
James Silverton
>> On Jun 19, 7:46 am, Steve Hayes <hayesm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> From the ensuing dicussion it would seem that "patriot" is
>>> now an epithet reserved for neo-fascist right-wing
>>> xenophobes, so it's probably not a bad thing.
>>
>> And if sharing an epithet with "neo-fascist right-wing
>> xenophobes" isn't bad enough, you'd share it with a missile
>> as well..
> I saw a Jeep station wagon sporting the name "Renegade" the
> other day.
That's been used for years but is rather appropriate given the way
warranties may go with bankruptcy.
--
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
Robin Bignall
wrote:
>On Jun 19, 7:36 am, Steve Hayes <hayesm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Never apologise; it's a sign of weakness".
J Wayne, "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon".
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
franzi
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:31:30 -0700 (PDT), pdpi <pdpinhe...@gmail.com>
A. No, but it buys survival time.
--
franzi
Frank ess
I think he would have said "apologize".
"reSIST the URGE to exPLAIN"
-Screenwriter and Oscar nominee, in an AOL chatroom
--
Frank ess
Steve Hayes
Wollman) wrote:
>I wonder what evidence the (webforum) writer has for this. He/she/it
>seems to assume a discrete classification of individuals that is not
>supported by the evidence of history or modern society. (Repeat after
>me: "'Sexual orientation' is an invention of modern Western European
>culture.")
Care to elaborate?
Do you have any references?
Garrett Wollman
Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:33:05 +0000 (UTC), wol...@bimajority.org (Garrett
>Wollman) wrote:
>
>>I wonder what evidence the (webforum) writer has for this. He/she/it
>>seems to assume a discrete classification of individuals that is not
>>supported by the evidence of history or modern society. (Repeat after
>>me: "'Sexual orientation' is an invention of modern Western European
>>culture.")
>
>Care to elaborate?
>
>Do you have any references?
You could certainly start with the introduction to Cantarella's
/Bisexuality in Ancient Europe/, in which the author apologizes for
the anachronistic title.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
wol...@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
Steve Hayes
Wollman) wrote:
>In article <4moo35t6mipahs8sr...@4ax.com>,
>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:33:05 +0000 (UTC), wol...@bimajority.org (Garrett
>>Wollman) wrote:
>>
>>>I wonder what evidence the (webforum) writer has for this. He/she/it
>>>seems to assume a discrete classification of individuals that is not
>>>supported by the evidence of history or modern society. (Repeat after
>>>me: "'Sexual orientation' is an invention of modern Western European
>>>culture.")
>>
>>Care to elaborate?
>>
>>Do you have any references?
>
>You could certainly start with the introduction to Cantarella's
>/Bisexuality in Ancient Europe/, in which the author apologizes for
>the anachronistic title.
Thanks, I'll look out for it.
Does he/she deal with the question of when and why it changed?
Garrett Wollman
Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:41:02 +0000 (UTC), wol...@bimajority.org (Garrett
>Wollman) wrote:
>>You could certainly start with the introduction to Cantarella's
>>/Bisexuality in Ancient Europe/, in which the author apologizes for
>>the anachronistic title.
>
>Thanks, I'll look out for it.
>
>Does he/she deal with the question of when and why it changed?
Not directly, no, since her primary topic is pre-Christian Greece and
Rome.
Ildhund
> Ildhund wrote:
>>Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote...
>>> Ildhund wrote:
>>>
>>>>[1] There is an extraneous comma in definition 1.b. At least, I
>>>>couldn't make sense of it. How does one draw attention to such
>>>>things?
>>>
>>> Once you have convinced yourself there is an error you can
>>> inform the OED editors by email: oe...@oup.com or post. See:
>>> http://dictionary.oed.com/readers/research.html
>>>
>>Thank you. I found an e-form at
>>http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/support/
>>which allows for comments on content.
>>Do you think I'll get house points?
>
> I think "content" means the content of the website rather than the
> content of the OED itself.
For future reference, I just had a reply from oe...@oup.com saying
that '[i]t does take time for
corrections to work their way through...'[1] So that does seem to
be the way to go. Thank you.
[1] Two and a half year ago, I suggested to the British Nutrition
Foundation that a statement on their website - that each person in
the UK aged 15 or over consumed, on average, 10.2 litres of alcohol
per week - might benefit from revision. I was assured that their
information team '... will work to ensure the alcohol section of our
web site is up to date...' (implying that the rest of it will
languish into ever greater inaccuracy and obsolescence, I suppose).
This little OED escapade jolted my memory, so I went back to look at
http://www.nutrition.org.uk/home.asp?siteId=43§ionId=610&subSubSectionId=324&subSectionId=320&parentSection=299&which=1
[ http://tinyurl.com/ne2se9 ] - where the claim still stands under
the 'Alcohol in the UK Diet' paragraph a couple of scrolls down.
I wonder how many weeks it takes for 10.2 litres of alcohol to work
their way through?
--
Noel
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
Maybe the "information team" was not entirely sober.
>I wonder how many weeks it takes for 10.2 litres of alcohol to work
>their way through?
10.2 litres is only about 2.6 pints a day. The worst effects should
clear overnight, but I imagine that it would take days or weeks for the
system to become completely clear.
Ildhund
"Only"? My favourite hooch is 40% alcohol by volume. A 700ml bottle
of it thus contains 280ml of alcohol. 10.2/7 is about 1 460ml, so to
reach this average consumption, I should have to imbibe 1460/280 =
5.2 bottles of prime Scotch each day. I don't think days or weeks
would cut it, and there'd be a lot of happy worms around. I do hope,
on the other hand, that nobody asks the British Nutrition Foundation
to advise on rations for the first manned Mars landing.
--
Noel
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
I realised after posting that I was thinking of 10.2 litres of
alcohol-containing drink probably ale, beer or lager.
If it is the actual quantity of alcohol then I'm not sure what "working
through would entail. Do the post-death bacteria and maggots like a
drink, I wonder.
Tom P
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:37:08 +0200, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>
>> Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:40:25 +0200, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Like you I'm an ex-patriot, now living in mainland Europe since 1978.
>>>> As I have never seen the UK version, your post prompted me to check some
>>>> Youtube Big Brother episodes. I must say the English was not as bad as I
>>>> was expecting, but even though I originally come from the East London
>>>> area, I find Estuary English very ugly.
>>> Does that mean you're a renegade?
>>>
>>>
>> lol -that was a Freudian slip <g>.
>>
>> Come to think about it, I haven't been very patriotic since the time I
>> left the country.
>
> From the ensuing dicussion it would seem that "patriot" is now an epithet
> reserved for neo-fascist right-wing xenophobes, so it's probably not a bad
> thing.
>
> It appears that the change in meaning has been brought about by the said
> neo-fascist right-wing xenophobes using the term "patriot" as a
> self-description.
>
> Though when it comes to Britain, I think some political re-education is
> needed, as ignorance abounds -- see:
>
> http://methodius.blogspot.com/2009/06/britain-swings-to-rift-er-leght.html
>
>
Is it permissible to be "patriatic" rather than patriotic? The original
epithet "ex-pat" is an abbreviation of "expatriate".
T.
Robert Bannister
> Is it permissible to be "patriatic" rather than patriotic? The original
> epithet "ex-pat" is an abbreviation of "expatriate".
You're saying it doesn't mean a former Irishman?
--
Rob Bannister
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
How could it? Once an Irishman, always an Irishman.
Mike Lyle
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:54:47 +0000 (UTC), wol...@bimajority.org
> (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>
>> In article <h1bab5$5r0$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Ildhund <jn...@removemsn.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, Garrett, this Brit doesn't know what you're getting at. Which
>>> particular peculiarly British meaning of "patriot" do you regard as
>>> bizarre?
>>
>> The one in which patriotism is considered a vice rather than a
>> virtue.
>>
> Johnson thought it's the last refuge of a scoundrel, and I don't
> disagree.
I don't disagree, either. But for Dr Sam's part, he was in fact defining
not patriotism, but the scoundrel's last refuge.
--
Mike.