Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Americanization of spelling and terminology

Options
1356

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,089 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Kaybaykwah wrote: »
    Yes, and technical lingo in science keeps growing by leaps over the vernacular which shows that language is in constant progression. I am always checking out unknown terms on Internet slang when I encounter them. Some of that stuff looks like it was made up real fast, on the sly so to speak, for clickbaiting.
    Well the invention of the printing press also invented technical jargon, as more and more books were printed on ever more specialised subjects those subjects needed their own descriptive language beyond what either the vernacular or classical languages could offer(though they nicked and fiddled with the latter to fit, EG species names etc). As well as an increased focus on specialities it also gave us indexing and cross referencing which hadn't happened previously. Navigating your way around a pre printing press library was painful. Few enough books even had titles and no contents lists and one book could contain many different subjects. It happened pretty rapidly too. Within the span of a human lifetime everything changed. A century before the printing press it was possible for one person to know "everything" or at least be familiar with what was currently known, a century after it wasn't. The internet has done similar as far as the spread of jargon, both social and technical has gone.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #63
    Vita nova
    Registered Users Posts: 732 ✭✭✭Vita nova


    On the other hand, there is also an issue with hypercorrection, where a usage or spelling is correct in both American and British English but an alternative British English usage is favoured and the American version is considered wrong.

    In British English the 'is' and 'iz' spellings are correct in realise/realize, organisation/organization and other similar words, in fact some BrE dictionaries favour the 'iz' spelling, however this is considered to be an exclusively American spelling by many on this side of the Atlantic and is often avoided and considered wrong as a result.


  • Options
    #64
    RikkFlair
    Registered Users Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭RikkFlair


    I went to college with a guy (from rural small town Ireland) who would refer to a strict lecturer as a HARD ASS.

    Man, what a goofball :pac:


  • Options
    #65
    SlowMotion321
    Registered Users Posts: 415 ✭✭SlowMotion321


    To misquote someone i'm too lazy to look up "Two countries divided by the same language"


  • Options
    #66
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    SlowMotion321 wrote: »
    To misquote someone i'm too lazy to look up "Two countries divided by the same language"

    Churchill


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    murpho999 wrote: »
    So many people use "defense" instead of "defence". See it all over the soccer forun.

    Also, people who say "awesome" are annoying.


    The defense thing is annoying alright. I'm wondering if "defense" is actually a word or not.



    For example the s and the c in some of these word differentiates the verb from the noun.
    You might practise playing the guitar when you go to band practice. AFAIK.


    And I think you can take offense at being accused of committing a criminal offence.



    Don't know if there is any application for the word "defense" if it even exists.


  • Options
    #68
    SlowMotion321
    Registered Users Posts: 415 ✭✭SlowMotion321


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    Churchill

    Lies! Damn lies and statistics!


  • Options
    #69
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Yeah but I'd enough people use the "wrong" version, then it becomes understood. Then it's perfectly useful so it's "right" in that sense. That's precisely how language changes in practical terms.


    It's not grammatically correct. It's wrong.



    It might get the point across when it's spoken....."should of" sounds like "should've" (shortening of "should have"). But when written, "should've" makes sense, "should of" doesn't.


    If someone wrote it in an essay that I was marking I would give them an F.


  • Options
    #70
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,413 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    The defense thing is annoying alright. I'm wondering if "defense" is actually a word or not.



    For example the s and the c in some of these word differentiates the verb from the noun.
    You might practise playing the guitar when you go to band practice. AFAIK.


    And I think you can take offense at being accused of committing a criminal offence.



    Don't know if there is any application for the word "defense" if it even exists.

    I don't think it's an extra meaning and it's just a British English v American English thing.


  • Options
    #71
    Bobblehats
    Registered Users Posts: 4,707 ✭✭✭Bobblehats


    Aloominum


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    If you think that change couldn't happen, then I think you probably don't know how much the English language has already changed. If you time travelled to the 1200s England, you would have to learn the language they spoke.

    The language spoken back then lead directly to the language we speak today, but it continually evolved and will continue to evolve to the point that in a few hundred years, a modern English speaker probably couldn't understand the conversation were having with each other right now.


    You're guilty of another one that burns my ass.


    The past tense of the verb to LEAD is LED.


  • Options
    #73
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,413 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    You're guilty of another one that burns my ass.


    The past tense of the verb to LEAD is LED.

    And you can't get more americanised than that.


  • Options
    #74
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,998 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    It's not grammatically correct. It's wrong.



    It might get the point across when it's spoken....."should of" sounds like "should've" (shortening of "should have"). But when written, "should've" makes sense, "should of" doesn't.


    If someone wrote it in an essay that I was marking I would give them an F.

    Yeah it's wrong, for now.

    How much of the language you use, would have been considered wrong in the past?


  • Options
    #75
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,998 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    You're guilty of another one that burns my ass.


    The past tense of the verb to LEAD is LED.

    Thanks.


  • Options
    #76
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    murpho999 wrote: »
    I don't think it's an extra meaning and it's just a British English v American English thing.


    No, in British English practise is the verb, practice is the noun.


    Same with advise/advice.


    I advise you to take an umbrella with you, or


    "Take an umbrella. That's my advice."


  • Options
    #77
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,413 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Yeah it's wrong, for now.

    How much of the language you use, would have been considered wrong in the past?

    Not that much. If you read a classic form 19th century it still pretty much follows grammar in place today.

    I think language changed hundreds of years ago due to regional variations of languages coming together as technology developed and the world became a smaller place but gramatically wrong things today like "your" and "you're " will remain in place.
    That and "could have/could of" are pronunciation and understanding errors rather then a language evolving and developing.


  • Options
    #78
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,413 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    No, in British English practise is the verb, practice is the noun.


    Same with advise/advice.


    I advise you to take an umbrella with you, or


    "Take an umbrella. That's my advice."

    Oh sorry I was only talking about defence v defense.


  • Options
    #79
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    murpho999 wrote: »
    Oh sorry I was only talking about defence v defense.


    And I think you are right on that score. I thought there might have been a verb/noun difference but it doesn't look like there is.



    I thought that because we have defence but we also have indefensible.

    Looks like "defense" is just an Americanism. Numpties.


  • Options
    #80
    764dak
    Registered Users Posts: 1,847 ✭✭✭764dak


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Yeah it's wrong, for now.

    How much of the language you use, would have been considered wrong in the past?

    Are you a language scientist?


  • Options
    #81
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,110 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Back in the C12 only a tiny fraction of the population could read and write and the only real use for writing was in producing legal documents, Church histories and prayers and maybe the odd cookbook. There was far less hanging on the writing skills of the average joe than there is now.

    Now most if not all jobs require literacy and while it is possible to get by guessing at what people mean, it is very, very easy for sufficiently lax use of language and grammar to creep into documents that a quite important letter, for example, could be sent out with the opposite meaning to what was intended. If everyone has to guess at what words mean then its going to be wrong quite a lot of the time. And it's nonsense to think that you can have one language for, say, social media, and another for business life, people will learn one way of spelling or construction and that's the one they will use.

    Its hard to get much worse than the 'cheep 3 peace sweet' request that I saw on local facebook recently!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    GinSoaked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,049 ✭✭✭GinSoaked


    looksee wrote: »
    ....

    Its hard to get much worse than the 'cheep 3 peace sweet' request that I saw on local facebook recently!

    Thats worth a thread on its own, "How many genuine words can you misuse and still convey your meaning", that won wood be hard to beet.


  • Options
    #83
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,089 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    looksee wrote: »
    Back in the C12 only a tiny fraction of the population could read and write and the only real use for writing was in producing legal documents, Church histories and prayers and maybe the odd cookbook. There was far less hanging on the writing skills of the average joe than there is now.
    Indeed and we can see a hint of that in the legal world down to today. You plead your case in a "hearing", swearing an oath to tell the truth of things. It's an oral environment going right back to the courts of the mostly illiterate medieval where testimony and evidence was mostly based on the memories of the community and as you say the guy who could write was just there to record the outcome for future reference.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #84
    Jurgen Klopp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,807 ✭✭✭Jurgen Klopp


    One thing that a current thread in relationship issues has reminded off is the latest fad of Irish people getting self righteous over the word cnut

    This outrage that it's some sort of extra special unholy insult seems to be creeping in here from the US

    I don't know about anyone else but growing up in rural Ireland it was seen on the same level as bitch or bastard and ditto in the UK and Australia

    People would want to turn off the ****in US programs

    CNUTS


  • Options
    #85
    Hamsterchops
    Registered Users Posts: 3,133 ✭✭✭Hamsterchops


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    American dates are worse. Many people in my work do it as they have worked for American companies in the past. It drives me mad... I don't know what date that is now. So so stupid.

    Happened to a friend who was booked into the optician who had sent out the appointment letter with an American date :)

    Went for his appointment on the 6/7/19 thinking he was due in the 6th of July. He was a month late, obviously not his fault as the optician (for whatever reason) had sent the appointment in US date format!

    Crazy stuff.


  • Options
    #86
    Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 443 ✭✭Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!


    Hamsterchops wrote: »
    Happened to a friend who was booked into the optician who had sent out the appointment letter with an American date :)

    Went for his appointment on the 6/7/19 thinking he was due in the 6th of July. He was a month late, obviously not his fault as the optician (for whatever reason) had sent the appointment in US date format!

    Crazy stuff.

    A supervisor told us in work today that a certain conference room was limited to two people due to covid social distancing and now it "cannot be used period".

    Since when did the term full stop fall into disuse?

    The same supervisor is often heard the phone reading out MAC addresses as 123 period 456 period 789 to other Irish people in other parts of the building.


  • Options
    #87
    Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 443 ✭✭Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!


    Hamsterchops wrote: »
    Happened to a friend who was booked into the optician who had sent out the appointment letter with an American date :)

    Went for his appointment on the 6/7/19 thinking he was due in the 6th of July. He was a month late, obviously not his fault as the optician (for whatever reason) had sent the appointment in US date format!

    Crazy stuff.

    I'd have demanded to be seen at that exact date and time with a written apology from whomever the appointment card was written by.


  • Options
    #88
    Hamsterchops
    Registered Users Posts: 3,133 ✭✭✭Hamsterchops


    ...that US date thing could be very serious though, if widespread, but as far as I know that was just a one off due to his computer being overhauled and rebooted (mistakenly) in US format. All dates were subsequently fixed and reissued in local Irish/UK format (dd,mm,yy).


  • Options
    #89
    Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 443 ✭✭Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!


    Hamsterchops wrote: »
    ...that US date thing could be very serious though, if widespread, but as far as I know that was just a one off due to his computer being overhauled and rebooted (mistakenly) in US format. All dates were subsequently fixed and reissued in local Irish/UK format (dd,mm,yy).

    To avoid confusion and even aid dyslexic people the dates should be written in the format of 01-JUL-2020 with the day beside for for clarification.

    Wednesday 01-JUL-2020


  • Options
    #90
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,110 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    The overwhelming logic of having the date written as (shortest period of time) day; (next longest period of time) month; (longest period) year is hard to ignore. But a country that insists on using inches, feet and yards and then divides the inch into 10ths rather than its original and natural division of half, quarter, eighth etc is mind boggling. 2.6 inches. What kind of a measurement is that? If you want to divide by 10ths use the feckin' metric system!

    And don't get me started on cups. Why would anyone scoop peanut butter or syrup into a cup, only to have to then scrape it out again and wash the cup?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 443 ✭✭Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!


    looksee wrote: »
    The overwhelming logic of having the date written as (shortest period of time) day; (next longest period of time) month; (longest period) year is hard to ignore. But a country that insists on using inches, feet and yards and then divides the inch into 10ths rather than its original and natural division of half, quarter, eighth etc is mind boggling. 2.6 inches. What kind of a measurement is that? If you want to divide by 10ths use the feckin' metric system!

    And don't get me started on cups. Why would anyone scoop peanut butter or syrup into a cup, only to have to then scrape it out again and wash the cup?

    A friend of mine posted on Facebook that she lost "2.7 stones" [sic].

    I assume she meant 2 stone and 7 pounds.
    How can something expressed as a fraction of x/14 be conveniently expressed as a decimalised figure? Without converting her original and final weight and a decimalised figure and subtracting the from each other then reporting that decimalised figure.

    I am digressing though :)


Advertisement