Language Change Index

7 years ago

last modified: 7 years ago

Yoyobon's Spelling....is it relevant any more? thread has morphed into a grammar and usage discussion. It reminds me of Brian Garner's Language-Change Index, which I've encountered a few times over the years. The five stages of language change he defines seem spot-on to me. For example, it's probably time for me to get over my "less vs. fewer" pet peeve (Oh those grocery store checkout signs!), as I believe it's at stage 4, nearing stage 5 on the Language Change Index.

Where do you think your pet peeves fall on this scale?
======================================================

Stage 1 (“rejected”): A new form emerges as an innovation (or a dialectal form persists) among a small minority of the language community, perhaps displacing a traditional usage (e.g.: “your” misused for “you’re”).

Stage 2 (“widely shunned”): The form spreads to a significant fraction of the language community but remains unacceptable in standard usage (e.g.: *”pour over books” for “pore over books”).

Stage 3 (“widespread but . . .”): The form becomes commonplace even among many well-educated people but is still avoided in careful usage (e.g.: “clinch” misused for “clench”).

Stage 4 (“ubiquitous but . . .”): The form becomes virtually universal but is opposed on cogent grounds by a few linguistic stalwarts (die-hard snoots) (e.g.: “often” pronounced “OF-tuhn””).

Stage 5 (“fully accepted”): The form is universally accepted (not counting pseudo-snoot eccentrics) (e.g.: “decimate” for inflicting large-scale destruction).

Featured Answer

vee_new

7 years ago

last modified: 7 years ago

If you have ever read the ghastly pompous book Augustus Carp written by 'Himself' you will see the the three churches in his area of London are St James the Great, St James the Less and St James the Least of All.

A very amusing 'tongue in cheek' tale but at least the grammar is correct.

Augustus Carp

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (80)

friedag
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Vee, yes, in the U.S. soldier is pronounced with an audible L -- most of the time as /sol-juhr/ (note that /uh/ represents the upside down e, schwa sound again). This time it is the /d/ sound that is silent. I won't say the L is always pronounced and the D is always silent, because every time I state something categorically, someone points out to me that in such-and-such region of the U.S. it is different. With some non rhotic speakers soldier is pronounced /sol-jah/ as Kath noted above in her actual pronunciation of solder.
friedag
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
The differences in pronunciation fascinate me. I love to hear a Brit say Managua, Nicaragua and jaguar. In the 1970s there was a British band called Procol Harum that had a hit song titled 'Conquistador.' The singer pronounced it /con-kwisst-a-dor/. I also remember Jack Bruce of Cream singing in 'Tales of Brave Ulysses' about turquoise which he pronounced /tur-kwhaz/. Then there's Jethro Tull's 'Aqualung'. The different pronunciations make the songs that much more memorable to me.
Related Discussions
Indexing valves, toggle valves...
Q
Comments (9)
No, I don't do things the way everyone esle does. Everyone else buries their waterlines below the frost line. I run mine flush into the sod. This is easy to install, easy to modify, easy to fix. Most other people use PVC pipe. After looking at the environomental impact of PVC, I avoid it whenever possible. I use black poly pipe and by preference glass filled nylon joints. Most other nurseries keep bare earth. I keep mowed pasture. I use almost no herbicide, and zero pesticide, depending on the birds and predatory bugs to work for me. Most other nurseries put all of each kind of egg in one basket. E.g. a big one to the south of me has a quarter section of just shubert chokecherries. I try to have no more than a few hundred of anything together. This means that a bunch of mice who develop a taste for scots pine bark stop at the blue spruce boundary. As far as I know I'm the only guy in Alberta to raise trees entirely in containers. Means I can put a MUCH larger tree in a pot than the guys with field trees. (A 5 foot larch does quite well in a #2 pot.) I overwinter my pots above ground -- results are species dependent. Spruce do well if packed close together, willows are fine. White pine is unhappy. I'm moving to Pot in Pail. Rather than buy a socket pot -- with holes that line up with the liner pot, I salvage pails from the dump, clean them, and put holes in them that DONT line ukp with the liner pot. A #5 trade pot fits nicely inside. It takes me about 30 seconds each per pot to remove the lid, clean it, drill holes in it. So with farting around call it 30 pails an hour. Given that good #7 pots cost several dollars each this is good return on my time. (Right now the biggest issue is finding the pails) Rather than spend 30K per acre, putting in fancy drainage I chose a patch of land that has very sandy subsoil. A hole filled with water drains in 10 minutes. I mark the hole locations with survey paint, and hire a high school kid to auger holes in. He can set about 25 pails per hour. Works out to about 50 cents. So a row of 100 pots costs me 50 bucks of hired kid, 3 hours wear on my groundhog, 2 hours of my time processing the pots (also kid labour possible) and the time to scrounge 100 pails (typically an afternoon.) Every one else runs their greenhouse north-south. I plan to make mine east-west. Everyone else makes a separate head house. I plan to put an insulated wall 1/3 of the width from the north side. Paint it white. In spring here the sun is fairly low. (Its 36 degrees up at noon on spring solstice) So bedding plants tend to lean to the south. With a white north wall, I should be able to even out the illumination considerably, at the cost of 1/3 of the floor space. Insulate the north side too. Gives me a triangular space 1/3 W by L with a height ranging from 12 feet at the wall down to the bottom of the greenhouse wall. This space will be mostly filled with water barrels -- about 180 for a 60 x 30 house. 3 per foot of length The exhaust fans will pull air from the peak and run through the barrels, and exit the bottom of the triangular space. At night, the air goes back to the green house under the benches. I figure I can heat a greenhouse down to about -15 C in March for the price of running fans. Math: A double poly greenhouse averages R1 per square foot of floor space. If I want to maintain 50 F temps inside, I have roughly a 50 degree differential. So a 1 foot slice of greenhouse 20 feet wide has 20 square feet of floor space, which will take 20*50 = 1000 BTU/hour to heat. Or about 12000 btu for a night. For the sake of making numbers simple, increase that to 15000 3 barrels of water is 1500 lbs of water. So I have to raise the temp of the water by 10 F to have enough heat. Air has about the 40% thermal energy as water -- per pound. Air at the top of the peak is typically 20-30 degrees warmer than the ground level when the air doesn't circulate Daytime green house temps run about 70-75, so peak temps are about 100. To get 15000 btu, assuming only 30% efficiency in heating the barrels, I have to move 40000 lbs of 100 degree air to get a 10 degree rise. Air is about an ounce per cubic foot, so 40,000 lbs of air is about 640,000 cubic feet. At 8000 cfm that's about 80 minutes. Given that the bulk of the heating will happen in 3-5 hours in mid day, this is a comfortable margin.
...See More
107 highs with heat index of 114 predicted for today
Q
Comments (10)
Hmm. I must have forgotten, for it seems like we have had a drought the last 5 years, with the exception of last year. No rain during the summer, except for last year. And, actually we had quite a bit of rain in June and early July, which is abnormal for us. We had an extremely wet winter this year, such that the subsoil got a good soaking. If we can just make it to the end of August, I think we'll be okay. Most summers (except for last summer) we get absolutely no rain after May until September. So, the fact that we did get several summer storms, is something I was thankful for, knowing that we would probably have to ride out drought for the remainder of the summer. The heat is what is causing most of the damage in my yard - to the hostas, anemones, campanulas, hydrangeas, etc. But, they have made it through drought before, so there is no reason for me to believe that they won't make it again. They just turn crispy and die back to the ground. When the weather cools off in fall, they will pop back up. I wish I were into drought tolerant plants and xeriscaping, but I'm not. I love my water loving plants, my aroids, clematis, ferns, etc. I have to water because the darn trees suck it up from my plants. Drat those things! If they were pretty trees, I'd feel differently. If the NICE NEIGHBORS watered their trees, too, I'd feel differently about them. But NO - they let their trees go and don't do anything to take care of them. One of the neighbors keeps saying he is going to cut some of his down. His whole back yard is nothing but nasty disease-ridden trees, all planted so closely together that the branches rot and dry out and fall in MY yard. Grrrrr..... Susan
...See More
(Food) Price Index to All-Time High
Q
Comments (14)
God bless the grass that grows through cement. It's green and it's tender and it's easily bent. But after a while it lifts up its head, For the grass is living and the stone is dead, And God bless the grass. --Malvina Reynolds I was thinking about this some days ago, that they're covering over some of the best farmland in the world, in the San Joaquin Valley, with subdivisions. And how when there's no more food and water in the Valley, they'll be digging up houses and parking lots looking for good earth. I'm not a big food snob. I love a good burger, emphasis on the "good" (best I ever had was in a roadside stand in the backwoods of Oregon). I love Amy's Macaroni and Soy Cheeze (frozen prepared food). But in the past few years, in big city fine dining restaurants, I've had really fine meals only a couple of times. That wasn't a food quality issue or availability issue. It was a lack of care. And I think that's at the root of a lot of these other issues as well. I saw a report on TV about the "new cuts" of meat. They had people who "invented" them. A lot of it was about producing more affordable cuts that would cook up better than just cutting slabs off the larger hunk. What makes me wonder though is the growing popularity of cuts formerly thought to be inferior. Following the faddish popularity of fajitas, skirt steak became very popular and fine dining chefs are now treating it as a prize. The whole point of fajitas was that the skirt was cheap. It was tough and almost considered trimmings, and by marinating it for three days and frying it up with the onion and peppers it could be made into something yummy. There's very little skirt on an animal, however, so with low supply and high demand... Chicken wings became a thing because they used to be cheap too because they were undesirable. They're bony, little meat, and hard to cook. Even harder to eat with a knife and fork. They're not cheap anymore! But I did learn the trick to soup bones. The butcher told me. If you ask for soup bones in his store, it costs about the same as ground chuck. If you ask for dog bones, the same bones cost about $2/lb. I too miss the free bones (though they do give free shankbones for Passover), but $2 for meaty, marrowy bones doesn't feel outrageous. I was watching a news discussion show to see one of my dear ones showing her expertise, but just before her segment was a discussion of "food gentrification". They were talking about how rich people had discovered chard and driven up the price and now were doing the same with collards. They said this was affecting poor people's health, especially in the South where these greens have been an important staple, and nutritionally necessary.
...See More
Time To Buy A US Index Fund?
Q
Comments (25)
Chisue - As the person in charge of our family's investments, I say yes, go ahead and buy into an index fund. With your already good diversification and common sense and understanding of the portfolio you already own, and with your children established, you are in an excellent position to do this. You do not need any detailed understanding of how the market works to invest in something as simple as an index fund. 23 years ago I invested in Vanguard's Index 500 fund and our investment has quadrupled over that time despite some pretty significant dips. I have withdrawn a small amount of money perhaps 4 - 5 times over the duration, when I didn't want to touch cash or our IRAs. The taxes and expenses on index funds are extremely low, another reason they are so attracitve. Despite all this, four times my original investment makes me happy! Just to establish my street cred. DH and I are nearing your age group and have similar concerns. Our children are grown and gone and on their own (and I do like to gift them with cash occasionally), so we are mainly involved with concerns of retirement right now, plus health issues, travel expenses, etc. We are in a fairly good situation and we have never used a financial advisor (although we've had good discussions with our accountant). I saw what "advisors" did to my mother. No thanks. Here's another thought: Money gurus recommend that senior citizens keep some money in stocks. People are living longer and need the financial growth that stocks provide, even if they don't plan to touch the money. I would suggest an Index 500 fund. This invests in the 500 largest companies in the USA, although sometimes fewer than 500 stocks are held. That really doesn't matter. Some recommend a total market index fund, which holds every domestic stock (more or less). I like the index 500, it follows the DOW (our 40 largest companies) pretty closely, so when I check CNBC I know pretty much where this particular investment is. I would do the Index 500, because it's so easy to understand. I would not invest outside the USA right now. I have held a little money in an international fund for almost 20 years, a good fund from a solid brokerage (T. Rowe Price), and it has barely doubled in that time. You can also ask the agent if a small cap index fund would be good now. It might be good to put most in the 500 and some in a small cap. But remember - these brokerage houses - Vanguard, Fidelity, etc., - are BY LAW not allowed to give you advice. They can only explain, very thoroughly, but they cannot tell you what you should do. There is no charge for your conversations with them, and they may not give you advice. Maybe a few little suggestions, but nothing that you could hold the company accountable for. Any time is the best time to invest. Get In and Stay In. Do not panic. I have always withheld a modest amount of money in case of severe crashes, so that I could buy a bit more on a serious dip, but I never bought a lot more, because I try not to market-time. One can go crazy trying to time the market! Fidelity has a great story about this. The market crashed badly in 1989-1990, just before the first Gulf War. Fidelity's people were innudated with calls from panicked customers. One of them answered a call and there was an elderly gentleman on the line. He was apparently not aware of the crash. He said that he had put a bit of money into the Fido's first mutual fund many years before and was wondering what it was worth. The callperson looked at his chart and saw how much that fund had just lost, but also, that it was up tremendously from his initial investment. "$300,000" she replied, worried about his reaction. "Yippee!" he yelled, and hung up. It's all a matter of perspective. Anyway, sorry for blathering on. How you do this: Call Vanguard from its online number and tell them that you want to invest in a mutual fund. They will transfer you to one of their agents. It is so simple. He will explain what to do and tell you that he will send you the forms. When they arrive, you fill them out, write the check and send it all in. Or you can probably do this over the phone if you have the money in a checking account, which can be linked to your Vanguard account. You can also do everything online with a linked account, but am not sure if that's possible for an initial investment. It would probably be good for you to talk to an actual human being on your first visit. These people are very accommodating! They are used to dealing with all kinds of people, of any age, any language ability, crabby, pleasant, whatever. Apologies for the lecture. I hope it helps. If you have any questions for me, I usually go to the Home Decor Conversations forum a few times a day. I might forget that I've been here. So give me a shout-out over there if necessary. And good luck. You are thinking very wisely.
...See More
vee_new
7 years ago
Thanks Frieda. I have to admit I don't know what rhotic/non rhotic speech is! Is there some simple explanation you are able to supply please?
friedag
7 years ago
Whew! Vee, that's a tall order for me to boil down rhoticity and non rhoticity into a simple explanation. It's too easy to get completely into the weeds because of all the exceptions. There are entire semesters/terms of coursework that can be devoted to rhotic, non-rhotic, and partially rhotic speech. It would probably be best for you to search the Internet for linguistics sites that give audible examples and charts where these speech patterns are heard. They become readily apparent when they are heard.

About all I can do briefly is start with a baseline: Rhotic speakers will do their best to retain the /r/ sound to pronounce it whenever a word is spelled with an R in it, wherever it appears. Rhotic speakers are often accused of over-emphasizing the /r/ sound; think of the Scottish burr. Non-rhotic speech is characterized by the deleting of the /r/ sound except when it is the initial sound or it ties together two vowel sounds (butter and jam is the commonest example). The intrusive r, which we have discussed many times, is heard in non-rhotic speech ("lawr and order" is the classic example). Colonel pronounced as kernel is another example of the intrusive r, as is pronouncing words that end in a vowel to which a non-rhotic speaker will add an /r/ sound (saying Cuber for Cuba or Linder for Linda are examples).

I suspect that you are a non-rhotic speaker -- or possibly partially rhotic -- from your descriptions of the way you say certain words. Most English speakers are non-rhotic except possibly in the west of England and the north-west. I recall seeing isoglosses of Lancashire where rhoticity appears and there are other pockets.
msmeow
7 years ago
Frieda, my HS band director said "warsh", as in "warsh the car". I think he was from the Midwest somewhere. Most of my relatives on my Mom's side are from Georgia or South Carolina, so I didn't "heah" many Rs growing up! LOL

Donna
vee_new
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
My goodness Frieda, to think that people write books/teach classes on such an, at first glance, narrow subject.

Thank you for your speedy response. I'll do a bit of hunting, out in the ether.
friedag
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Donna, my daughter-in-law who is from southeastern Kentucky recently asked me: "Do you want to rinch the dishes before we warsh them?" Sometimes she likes to exaggerate her Appalachian dialect to entertain me, but she says that the 'rinch' and 'warsh' pronunciations are not exaggerations -- they are wholly authentic. :-)

Vee, let me know what you find!
carolyn_ky
7 years ago
Yes, indeed, warsh and rinch are alive and well in the sections I know in Kentucky--not so much in Louisville where some people think they are "cultivated/sophisticated."
Kath
7 years ago
I remember last time we had a discussion on pronunciation I made a video with some of the words we were talking about in it. Things like dog, yawn, aunt (and aren't), and some Australian placenames like Geelong and Melbourne.
Rosefolly
7 years ago
Back to the word "almond". I have always pronounced it "ah-mond", almost like "amen" at the end of a prayer. An orchard advisor gave a speech here earlier today in which she told us that when she moved to the northern part of the state, people up there pronounce it "am-mond", the first syllable exactly like the word "am". She changed her way of speaking so that people would understand her -- but before that, she had pronounced it "all-mond"!

Beyond that, I am one of those stubborn, dig-my-heels-in grammar dogmatists. I get it that the tide of history is against me, and that there is no moral imperative to stick to the rules I learned. But darn it, I loved those rules. They brought clarity and meaning. I fail to see how sloppiness and obscurity are an improvement.

But then, I hate it when they re-arrange the grocery store, too.
kathy_t
Original Author
7 years ago
Rosefolly - Funny! And well said:
I get it that the tide of history is against me, and that there is no moral
imperative to stick to the rules I learned. But darn it, I loved those rules.

It truly is a bummer when the thing that we readers excel at is deemed not-terribly-important by society at large. I think it was rather clever of Brian Garner to rise above this trend by becoming a "language-change expert" in addition to being a grammarian.
woodnymph2_gw
7 years ago
Interesting about "warsh" and" rinch". I lived for a time in NW PA and was amazed to hear those pronunciations of "wash" and "rinse." And where I was living was far away from Appalachia. I assumed it was a midwestern thing, since the midwest is thought to start in Ohio and we were not far from the border.
carolyn_ky
7 years ago
Woodnymph, my husband was from East Liverpool, Ohio, at the juncture of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. (He said he used to ride his bike through three states on a Saturday afternoon.) Although the accent is different, the word usage of some of the local people there is similar to rural Kentucky--not our mountain area; I'm not familiar with that. I do have one friend from Wise, Virginia, on the KY borde,r who says "it's untelling" where we would say "there is no telling how many . . . " I find word usage very interesting. One thing that amuses me is "he's from off" to mean someone is not local.
yeonassky
7 years ago
We say allmond for almond. No L in salmon.

I like what the English language history Professor I've linked below says. When I get caught up in my pet peeve of the day I remind myself all these rules were made up by people and will continue to be. Besides as a poet and story writer I love having a poetic license. ;) I do like to do things right as well though. It's a real conundrance ;) (conundrum+hindrance)

Anne Curzan Linguist
vee_new
7 years ago
I have hunted around the internet especially 'youtube' to come up with eg's of rhotic speech patterns. After the challenge of rhotic diphthongs and lax vowel variants plus a few feeble 'home' video's obviously made in a student bedroom I rather gave up the will to live. I then moved on to a couple of interesting sites where old 'Hill Billies' of Appalachia chatted about this and that, which I found far more comprehensible and entertaining.

Kath, I remember enjoying your video and I know it was 'somewhere' on youtube but haven't been able to find it again.
friedag
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
yeonassky, thanks for the link to Anne Curzan's piece. Curzan is the kind of etymologist I enjoy, as I am a descriptivist by training -- and by nature (I think).

However, I certainly understand Rosefolly's point: . . . darn it, I loved those rules. Rules can be very comforting.

It truly is a bummer when the thing that we readers excel at is deemed not-terribly-important by society at large.

Kathy, sometimes it seems to me that nearly everything that I've always been good at is now hardly important at all. :-(
kathy_t
Original Author
7 years ago
Yeonassky - Thank you for the Anne Curzan Ted Talk. Very interesting and, well, adorkable.
woodnymph2_gw
7 years ago
Carolyn, I've heard "he's from off", as well, When I moved to SC 6 years ago, I was intrigued to hear about "come-heres" and "been-heres". (Meaning those newly arrived as opposed to "natives".) Charleston is a very insular city, filled with older families, albeit friendly.
friedag
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Vee, I didn't see your post about searching for examples of rhotic speech on 'YouTube' until just a few minutes ago, although you posted right before I did last night (your morning?).

I should have warned you that a lot of linguistic jargon is nearly impenetrable. Unless you find the subject especially fascinating (as I do), it takes a lot of wading through arcane muck to find plainspoken explanations. I suppose linguists can't help themselves in making things much too complicated for persons with casual or just-beginning interest. See why I didn't think I could manage to explain it without being too tedious? :-)

Astrokath did a wonderful job creating her video with examples of her pronunciations. I listened to her many times. I particularly remember the dorg's pores which I couldn't imagine without actually hearing it. Spelling just doesn't always cut it. When we spell something the conventional way, there is no guarantee a reader will be "hearing" the same sounds or having the same images in mind.
carolyn_ky
7 years ago
Wood, I like come here's and been here's and didn't need your explanation to understand what they meant. Save your Confederate money. The South will rise again.
vee_new
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Thanks for getting back Frieda, my post went 'in' probably before 10am yesterday although I'm sure I wrote it the day before!. I will never understand why some posts appear at the touch of a key pad and others wander through the ether for several hours!

Re reading/hearing the spoken word. I wonder at the very indifferent quality of some of the you tube sites, especially from people claiming to be speech experts etc.

A slightly better eg is one by an English man (wearing a cricket sweater) describing why we English can't hear the 'r' at the end of a word. All rather complicated but at least he keeps going.

The elusive 'r'
vee_new
7 years ago
Carolyn, in this rather rural neck of the woods, although folk now seem more at ease with outsiders they are often described as strangers. We moved here in 1980, from all of 7 miles down the road and were regarded with some suspicion for many years. People were not hostile or rude and would reply when greeted but we were made to understand we were from Ultima Thule for many years. Had we come from 8 miles away we would have been known as "them Welshies" and to keep a passport handy to prove our non-Welshness. ;-) Many 'locals' still like to put us right/in our place about what's what saying "You weren't here then" . . . meaning . . ."so what do you know about anything?"
kathy_t
Original Author
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Vee - I enjoyed the video of the man in the cricket sweater. Along with being entertaining, I thought he made some interesting points. His comment about American speech being perceived as loud and aggressive made smile. I remember once being seated on the Tube in London, with a tight circle of four standing Brits crushed in close against my knees. They all burst into laughter, then one of them said in a stage whisper, "Stop being so loud. They'll think we're Americans."

By the way, I did not even notice the crooked picture until the video pointed it out.
carolyn_ky
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
One of my proudest moments happened on a plane when I was going to London. I had been chatting off and on with the woman seated beside me when she asked if I were going home. I said no that I was visiting London, and she said, "Oh, I thought you were English." She must not have had much of an ear for accents, me of the down-home country-style speech.
Rosefolly
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
It is flattering to be thought of as being in the know.

I remember waiting to cross a street in Paris some years ago. An elderly couple who were visiting, probably from the country, came up to me and asked directions. In French! Now I have a speaking vocabulary of maybe 100 French words (and maybe 500+ written ones), but no actual French person can understand them when I say them. ;-)

I smiled to myself all day that day.
msmeow
7 years ago
A friend of mine was visiting one of the cathedrals in England and the docent asked what language he would like a brochure in. He said English and she sniffed and said, "Of a sort!"

Donna
annpanagain
7 years ago
It seems that bad pronunciation of a word can be spread by hearing someone on radio or TV misuse it. Our presenters and newsreaders have been calling Las Vegas "Los Vegas" recently. I don't know who started that.

Years ago, for fun, I suggested to my radio newsreader husband that he pronounce the name of a local department store Boans as "Bow-ans" and not the common usage of "Bones".

Sure enough, it was picked up and repeatedly used on other local radio stations. Successful experiment indeed!
Kath
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
If anyone is interested, my video (made 8 years ago apparently, yikes!) is here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUtjbzq3QiY

As always, hearing my own voice is quite off-putting, but the accent is there.

My husband must have an approachable face as he is constantly being asked directions when he is in foreign places. He got asked directions when he was walking across a pedestrian crossing in San Diego from someone in a car when he'd been there about 2 hours.
vee_new
7 years ago
Kath, thanks for replaying 'your' video. You will be pleased to know that I pronounce all the words you mention in the same way! And I'm sure you don't look a day older . . .

I notice the, to me, new-ish American word 'snarky' which I hadn't heard until a US RP'er emailed me to tell me that it described me! Is it a corruption of 'sarcastic' and something else? I don't think it is in general use over here; we have plenty of other less than polite words to describe people. ;-)
annpanagain
7 years ago
Vee, I have Googled "snarky" which is described as a word for snide and critical. You are allowed to be critical here but I have never thought you were snide. Perhaps that RP'er doesn't understand your sense of humour...

I picked up a couple of paperbacks in a charity shop of Charlaine Harris's Harper Connolly series, which I read a long time ago. I borrowed the other two from the library to re-read, then passed all four to my D to enjoy. She hadn't come across them before and was pleased to discover them.

Neither of us usually reads fantasy but I could make a stretch to belief in Harper's gift after being hit by lightning. After all, who knows what could happen after such an event!
sheri_z6
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Vee, I always think of "snarky" in terms of sarcastic, witty, and usually somewhat negative -- but negative in a way that is amusing, meant to point out the silliness of something, and not necessarily snide or critical (terms I consider to be much more harsh). Perhaps I've been using it incorrectly? I hope that makes sense. And you are definitely not snide!

Kath, I enjoyed the YouTube video, thanks for re-posting, I hadn't seen it before. My daughter was in Melbourne last year and I did learn how to pronounce that properly :)
carolyn_ky
7 years ago
Vee, you have a wonderful dry sense of humor that is by no means snarky. Keep it up. I, at least, am vastly entertained by it.

Ann, there is a book by Barbara Wood called Childsong in which a young girl was struck by lightning in a swimming pool and becomes pregnant. Being innocent and Catholic, she believes she is carrying a divine baby. It's an interesting book.
yeonassky
7 years ago
Glad you enjoyed it Frieda and Kathy. I enjoyed yours Kathy. I love the how I pronounce things game.

If I were to have one grammar wish, I would love it if people would say were instead of was after if and its friends. Of course that's not going to happen so I force myself to accept the new norm and move on. Pizza helps :)
Rosefolly
7 years ago
I have the exact same wish. Pizza does help, a bit. I also wish people understood when to use the word fewer and when to use less. And most of all, I wish people would stop saying process-ease instead of processes. But apparently they are not going to do that.
msmeow
7 years ago
I've never been clear on when to use "were" or "was", so thanks Yeonassky!

I found a grammar test online yesterday and I got all 25 questions right! I was pretty sure I'd missed at least one. Of course, who knows if the creators of the test actually know what they are talking about? There were several questions about "affect" vs. "effect" and several with "to" vs. "too", so those were pretty easy.

Donna
yeonassky
7 years ago
Donna I work very hard at not being a grammar police so if you were to use was with if I would not say boo to you. :) Would you please link your grammar test? I'm notoriously bad at tests and don't ever get 100% so congrats. :)
annpanagain
7 years ago
I am getting off the point but I would like to mention behavioural changes as well as language ones.

Many years ago, in the UK, people just used to laugh at jokes at the theatre and on radio. Then clapping came in, much to the disgust of the older generation. Now people clap themselves for an achievement, such as on quiz shows. I find this annoying.

(Applauds self ironically and retires from the stage!)
vee_new
7 years ago
Annpan I remember this used to happen many years ago when Russian athletes received medals/prizes, which I took to be their traditional 'thing'. These days pre-recorded TV and radio shows seem to have worked the audiences into such a 'high' pitch that they over-laugh and clap at the most feeble/bad-taste jokes. I'm just waiting for the arrival of the US 'habit' of hollering, yelling and whooping at the merest sight of a star or even (God help us) a politician, . . .
annpanagain
7 years ago
Vee, those noises, along with piercing whistles, sometimes happen with live studio audiences here. Thank goodness for the mute button and subtitles!
msmeow
7 years ago
Yeonasky, it was a link in a FB post, so I'm not sure I could find it again. (I'm mostly a luddite where FB is concerned LOL.)

The "audience" (which used to be called the congregation) applauds for the music during worship at our church. I think that is just WRONG! To me, the music is part of worship and not a "performance". (The current church leadership uses both "audience" and "performance" when talking about worship.) I guess that's why I don't attend there any more.

Donna
Rosefolly
7 years ago
Oh, that is too bad, Donna. I would make an exception for a concert given in a church that is not a part of a service.
vee_new
7 years ago
I must agree with both Donna and Rosefolly. I am not much of a church-goer but think applause is only appropriate if the church building is being used as a concert/play venue. I'm still not quite at home with the now quite common habit of serving 'refreshments' after a service. I know that many medieval churches over here have no separate facilities for such things (some don't even have a cold water tap let along a church hall for meetings etc) but crumbs in the nave or Coke spilt in the choir-stalls doesn't seem 'quite the thing'.

Donna, does the congregation clap after a particularly rousing sermon? I seem to remember seeing on TV that in some US places of worship it is not uncommon to hear "Alleluia" or 'Praise the Lord" during an address from the pulpit.

I guess I'm showing both my age and my stiff-upper-lip Englishness . . . and am probably too old to change!
msmeow
7 years ago
Vee, there is rarely applause during or after a sermon. :). We do have the occasional "amen." It's a Methodist church; the "amens" and " hallelujahs" are much more common in other denominations.

Donna
woodnymph2_gw
7 years ago
Vee, in many of the very southern protestant churches, often the "Amen!" or the 'Hallalujah!" is said loudly by the congregation, in response to prayers, etc. It's a tradition found especially in Black churches, as well. As you probably know, also in the Episcopal churches, the "Amen' is said, at certain points during the collects or responses.
phyllis__mn
7 years ago
Do you ever find that you have pronounced a word incorrectly forever? I just recently realized that I have been saying "spoonsful" and "cupsful" instead of putting the plural "s" after the "l". It still seems incorrect to me.....we are talking about the item being plural, not the fuls! After a bit of googling, I found that my use was archaic, perish the thought.
kathy_t
Original Author
7 years ago
Phyllis - That's interesting. I believe I would put the 's' last (the "non-archaic" usage), but when I think about it, your logic seems correct to me. It would be like "daughters-in-law."
vee_new
7 years ago
Phyllis, it doesn't sound strange to me, especially if you consider it/they are really two words that have been run together. You would say "add six spoons full of flour" rather than "six spoon fulls of flour"
annpanagain
7 years ago
Phyllis, l also would say spoonsful of sugar because it sounds correct! Of course, I am nearly eighty so deemed archaic!
carolyn_ky
7 years ago
This is the second post today that assures me that I am archaic. I think it is the same principle as sisters-in-law rather than sister-in-laws.
Kath
7 years ago
And courts martial, governors general, and host of others. I always say spoonsful, so obviously I am archaic too.

Language Change Index

Comments (80)

Related Discussions

kathy_tOriginal Author

kathy_tOriginal Author

kathy_tOriginal Author

kathy_tOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

kathy_t
Original Author

kathy_t
Original Author

kathy_t
Original Author

kathy_t
Original Author