<<but you're right on the litre thing, it looks more like a proper word>>
Yeah .. a proper word that is pronounced "lee-tray"! ;P
Yeah .. a proper word that is pronounced "lee-tray"! ;P
Is British English marginalized compared with American E?
Previous page Pages: 1 2
British or American English?
Speakers of British and American English display some striking differences
in their use of grammar.
∗Who lives on a street, and who lives in a street?
∗Who takes a bath, and who has a bath?
∗Who says Neither do I, and who says Nor do I?
∗After “thank you”, who says Not at all and who says You’ re welcome?
∗Whose team are on the ball, and whose team is?
Speakers of British and American English display some striking differences
in their use of grammar.
∗Who lives on a street, and who lives in a street?
∗Who takes a bath, and who has a bath?
∗Who says Neither do I, and who says Nor do I?
∗After “thank you”, who says Not at all and who says You’ re welcome?
∗Whose team are on the ball, and whose team is?
''Future time
English has two main verb signals of future time: (1) will or shall (the modal future) and (2) be going to (the periphrastic future). In general, British favors will or shall, and American be going to, notably in American conversation and fiction (LGSWE488). The be going to future is more recent and is still expanding in both varieties (Mair 1997). Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (2003) has identified the following differences in corpora of the two national varieties (parenthesized statistics are
from CIC for comparison):
1. Shall is rare in both varieties, but is more frequent in British than in American (in CIC, 6 times more frequent after personal pronouns).
2. The enclitic ’ll is more frequent in British than in American (in CIC, nearly
1.4 times more frequent).
3. Be going to, on the other hand, is more frequent in American than in British, especially in informal style (in CIC, nearly 2.3 times more frequent).
4. The negative contraction won’t is more frequent in British than in American (in CIC, on the contrary, it is more than 1.5 times more frequent in American).
5. The negative enclitic ’ll not, although rare in British, is not used at all in
American (CIC American texts have 5.4 iptmw, but British have 32.9).
6. Anegated formof be going to, e.g., I’m not going to, is more frequent in American than in British (more than 2 times as frequent).
7. Be going to, however, is relatively more frequent than will or shall in British English in subordinate clauses, compared with main clauses, but less so in American, and is especially more frequent in conditional if-clauses.
British also uses the modal future perfect for events in the past, especially
probable ones. Thus will have left is the equivalent of “(have) (probably) left.”
<I think he’ll have killed himself.> 1982 Brett 122. <[with reference to the
speed of driving:] ‘What car were you in?’ [ ¶ ] ‘My Jag.’ [ ¶ ] ‘Then you won’t have been hanging about, will you?’> 1988 Ashford 25.
Another use of the modal future is as a polite circumlocution instead of a
simple present tense.
<What was that onetabout loose talk? . . . You’ll know the one I mean.> 1989 Burden 115.''
John Algeo, British or American English?
English has two main verb signals of future time: (1) will or shall (the modal future) and (2) be going to (the periphrastic future). In general, British favors will or shall, and American be going to, notably in American conversation and fiction (LGSWE488). The be going to future is more recent and is still expanding in both varieties (Mair 1997). Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (2003) has identified the following differences in corpora of the two national varieties (parenthesized statistics are
from CIC for comparison):
1. Shall is rare in both varieties, but is more frequent in British than in American (in CIC, 6 times more frequent after personal pronouns).
2. The enclitic ’ll is more frequent in British than in American (in CIC, nearly
1.4 times more frequent).
3. Be going to, on the other hand, is more frequent in American than in British, especially in informal style (in CIC, nearly 2.3 times more frequent).
4. The negative contraction won’t is more frequent in British than in American (in CIC, on the contrary, it is more than 1.5 times more frequent in American).
5. The negative enclitic ’ll not, although rare in British, is not used at all in
American (CIC American texts have 5.4 iptmw, but British have 32.9).
6. Anegated formof be going to, e.g., I’m not going to, is more frequent in American than in British (more than 2 times as frequent).
7. Be going to, however, is relatively more frequent than will or shall in British English in subordinate clauses, compared with main clauses, but less so in American, and is especially more frequent in conditional if-clauses.
British also uses the modal future perfect for events in the past, especially
probable ones. Thus will have left is the equivalent of “(have) (probably) left.”
<I think he’ll have killed himself.> 1982 Brett 122. <[with reference to the
speed of driving:] ‘What car were you in?’ [ ¶ ] ‘My Jag.’ [ ¶ ] ‘Then you won’t have been hanging about, will you?’> 1988 Ashford 25.
Another use of the modal future is as a polite circumlocution instead of a
simple present tense.
<What was that onetabout loose talk? . . . You’ll know the one I mean.> 1989 Burden 115.''
John Algeo, British or American English?
That's right; I'm back.
And yes, I hate American slang.
It makes everything unbearably childish.
And yes, I hate American slang.
It makes everything unbearably childish.
As opposed to other kinds of slang, which are oh so pompous and mature? ;P
There's nothing wrong with being a child....just not the way a certain number of people from a certain nation act...
Before you point the finger at the Commonwealth nations for spelling, change the whole spelling for the entire language.
So, Guest, are you a moron? Who are you to point the finger?
Before you point the finger at the Commonwealth nations for spelling, change the whole spelling for the entire language.
So, Guest, are you a moron? Who are you to point the finger?
I like seeing some Scottish /Irish names in this Forum! It gives me a wee bit of pleasure to say the least.......
.....and talking about British English and whether it is marginalised or not, it certainly isn't the case with these guys from Norway (all of them about 19/21 years of age) performing at this year's 2008 Edinburgh Military Tattoo up there in our Castle - which looked even more resplendent when I saw from the Queensferry Road earlier this mornng looking all golden in the chilly early dawn sunrise.
They are the King of Norway's Guard and I saw them perform at the Tattoo, as in this clip.......towards the end they all sing our own "On the Bonnie, Bonnie Banks o' Loch Lomond" in a very non-marginalised British accent - the Scottish variety.
I doubt very much indeed that you would ever meet up with a Norwegian who is not fluent in English...I never have, and some have near perfect English English RP accents too, but those that don't have that lovely up and down cadence so typically Scandinavian.
I want to go to Norway on an assignment! .........either the ferry from Lerwick to Bergen or Newcastle to Stavanger will do just fine! ;-)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wHG2iDPSIFw&feature=related
.....and talking about British English and whether it is marginalised or not, it certainly isn't the case with these guys from Norway (all of them about 19/21 years of age) performing at this year's 2008 Edinburgh Military Tattoo up there in our Castle - which looked even more resplendent when I saw from the Queensferry Road earlier this mornng looking all golden in the chilly early dawn sunrise.
They are the King of Norway's Guard and I saw them perform at the Tattoo, as in this clip.......towards the end they all sing our own "On the Bonnie, Bonnie Banks o' Loch Lomond" in a very non-marginalised British accent - the Scottish variety.
I doubt very much indeed that you would ever meet up with a Norwegian who is not fluent in English...I never have, and some have near perfect English English RP accents too, but those that don't have that lovely up and down cadence so typically Scandinavian.
I want to go to Norway on an assignment! .........either the ferry from Lerwick to Bergen or Newcastle to Stavanger will do just fine! ;-)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wHG2iDPSIFw&feature=related
<<I like seeing some Scottish /Irish names in this Forum! It gives me a wee bit of pleasure to say the least.......>>
Yes, Damien, but always unpleasant to have it accompanied by bigotry. I think you would be ashamed to be forced to associate your own people with a person who displays such a degree of childishness both in intent and intellect. I know I would if I saw an American saying such things about any Nation of people. And I have called several Americans to task for making comments so laden with xenophobic intent. But, it was not about the United States like your friend’s was, so there wasn't a double standard that I could hide behind.
Yes, Damien, but always unpleasant to have it accompanied by bigotry. I think you would be ashamed to be forced to associate your own people with a person who displays such a degree of childishness both in intent and intellect. I know I would if I saw an American saying such things about any Nation of people. And I have called several Americans to task for making comments so laden with xenophobic intent. But, it was not about the United States like your friend’s was, so there wasn't a double standard that I could hide behind.
Previous page Pages: 1 2