| Author |
Message |
David
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2004 8:25 pm
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
In article <1n56ozgfqamkm$.8la7prjopwvf.dlg@40tude.net>, Wanderer
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:04:02 +0100, David wrote:
In article <1bii6r4rqew1r$.1nflp7tipjtlz.dlg@40tude.net>, Wanderer
me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:10:56 +0100, David wrote:
In article <1lijroc5zf9e7.ehmdlkunzxjx.dlg@40tude.net>, Wanderer
me@privacy.net> wrote:
snip
You're wriggling.
Curious? I wonder why you think I'm wriggling? Maybe it's because
your response was really quite out of order. I certainly didn't
make any reference whatsoever to non-British presenters. Perhaps
you're one of those who have yet to understand the concept of
Britishness when compared to Englishness?
snip
You're still wriggling.........
Really? I think you've only now seen how preposterous your
response was (vis-a-vis "non-British" presenters) and, scared of
losing face, are attempting to give the impression that my
position is unsteady; it is as firm as a rock.
You're still wriggling.
No, but you're still trolling.
That is your opinion. It is also a last resort on usenet to accuse
someone of trolling when you realise you have an unsustainable
argument.
|
Is it really?
On the other hand, I have an exceedingly sustainable argument and I
still insist that you are trolling.
So, it seems that, even if we take your word about last resorts (which,
I hasten to assure more sensible readers, is not necessarily the case
but I can't be fagged to argue the toss on it), someone can be accused
of trolling by a poster very assured of the validity of his stance.
Indeed, if the person so accused is particularly well known to troll,
the strength of the accusers' argument would really have no bearing.
| Quote: | You may have known what you wanted to say, but what you wrote most
certainly didn't say what you meant, and you know it! The earlier
post from Rob Kerr drew attention most succinctly to the inherrent
lack of clarity within your earlier statement.
The semi-colon would indicate the presenters; the accents would
call on a colon.
Oh, I see. When all else fails, give your own interpretation of the
rules. It is a very safe course of action for the English language,
where there is no final arbiter. Unfortunately this does not alter my
view that your choice of phrase that started this exchange is readily
open to mis-interpretation, something that you seem most reluctant to
acknowledge.
|
No, quite the contrary: when Rob posted that "the antecedent to "them"
in your last statement is unclear, and could refer to the accents or
the presenters themselves", my unequivocal response was, "How true."
That you now take the line apparent in your last paragraph is just
another illustration of your desire to troll.
However, I acknowledge the lack of clarity because of regard to the
probable intelligence of the reader, not of the writer; were I assured
that all my readers had an acquaintance with English equal to mine, I
would be secure in the knowledge of its perfect clarity: as I would
have been had I wished to refer to the accents using a semi-colon and
substituted the word "those" for "them".
| Quote: | Ah, but you didn't accuse me of lack of clarity, did you? You asked
me "why the distinction between British and English?"
No, I made the mistake of creditting you with enough intelligence to
go back and re-consider what you had written.
|
I made the mistake of considering what you wrote and failed to find any
reason why you should ask about a non-existent distinction. I see know
that you were merely trolling.
| Quote: | And I ask you again: What distinction? Seems to me that if anyone
is wriggling here, it's you.
Oh, I don't think so. It isn't me that is having to resort to
obfuscation in an attempt to muddy the waters.
|
If any waters are muddy, my dear Wanderer, it is because you have
pissed in them.
| Quote: | It would seem that this dialogue has reached its logical conclusion.
May I commend to you a little maxim that I try to keep in mind:-
Have I understood what the other guy is saying? Have I meant what I
said? Have I said what I mean?
|
Okay, now tell me what do did mean by asking me "why the distinction
between British and English?" when I made no distinction other than the
correct and obvious one.
--
http://www.dacha.freeuk.com/photo/0y15-0.htm
The recently renovated South face of Rockingham's magnificent pyramidal folly at Wentworth
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bogus address
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:12 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
| Quote: | Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian
Midlothian, Virginia is a tolerably short ride from where I live.
I think you underestimate the persistence of British culture and
language on your American cousins.
Off topic: What is the derivation of Midlothian? The naive assumption
is that there must be other Lothians not centrally located, cf. Essex-
Wessex, Norfolk-Suffolk, but it can't be that simple, right?
|
Midlothian is the county south of Edinburgh; it used to be called
Edinburghshire. There are also counties of West Lothian and East
Lothian. The whole area of Lothian is supposed to be named after
a semi-mythical (presumably Welsh) king called Loth. The lands of
the Marquis of Lothian are a rather different area, derived from
the holdings of the Abbey of Newbattle when it was privatized and
handed to the Ker family in the 17th century. The Lothian Coal
Company (their erstwhile family business) was mostly in Midlothian
and their family seat was a couple of miles from here at the old
abbey centre. Until last year the Marquis of Lothian was our feudal
superior, in a position to permit or refuse building alterations, so
the relationship was not purely linguistic.
As far as I know, there is no county in the US called Midlothian, but
the name is applied to a couple of towns. The most likely explanation
is that they got the name from Walter Scott's novel "The Heart of
Midlothian" (1818), one of the greatest hits of his entire career. The
fact that the name is applied to towns rather than county-sized areas
suggests that it was imposed by a Romantic-literature buff in authority
rather than adopted organically by a folk process.
There should be a midlothian.gov.uk website, I haven't looked.
========> Email to "j-c" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html> food intolerance data & recipes,
Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files and CD-ROMs of Scottish music. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:23 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
On Tuesday, in article
<4150ea7b$0$2665$61fed72c@news.rcn.com> mazorj@erols.com
"John Mazor" wrote:
| Quote: | If you care to document how "noine thewsand dawlers" springs from a later
era of the British branch of the English language, so much removed that it
could not possibly bear the loose attribution of "Elizabethan," please do so
and I shall be properly corrected.
|
To my mind, what you are trying to describe (and what I have heard in TV
programmes about these self-same "pockets of Elizabethan English" in the
USA) is akin to a West Country accent.
Since many of those new colonists were sentenced to "transportation for
life to the Virginias/Carolinas/Barbadoes", and often hung around for
months in and around Bristol, it's perhaps an assimilation of that
accent.
In the same way that, a century or so later, the Orsetryleans were
generated from people who languished in prison hulks on the Essex marshes
for some years before finally gaining their transportation.
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi-
national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet
software and decent hardware support."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:36 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"Molly Mockford" <nospamnobody@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote in message
news:UPeRTAJ5eSUBFw8q@molly.mockford...
| Quote: | At 22:58:46 on Tue, 21 Sep 2004, John Mazor <mazorj@erols.com> wrote in
4150ea7b$0$2665$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>:
Off topic: What is the derivation of Midlothian? The naive assumption
is
that there must be other Lothians not centrally located, cf.
Essex-Wessex,
Norfolk-Suffolk, but it can't be that simple, right?
East Lothian and West Lothian.
|
Ah. Thanks. Although I can't find an East or West Lothian here! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:36 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote in message
news:2rcouqF19dl1vU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | John Mazor wrote:
"Wanderer" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:11772qgxvk6ts.82jrpmmg51o3$.dlg@40tude.net...
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 08:45:18 +0100, David wrote:
snip
British news presenters on the Beeb exhibit different accents; many of
them aren't even English.
That's a rather sweeping, and possibly quite incorrect, statement to
make. And why the distinction between British and English?
For the record, this was BBC World News on radio and the presenters
(there
were several who did the boosh thing) had definite British accents. I
can't
pin it down any closer than that. I usually can pick out a pronounced
(double entendre intended) Irish or Scot accent, and some other obvious
ones
such as the Beatles' Liverpudlian, Cockney, and ethnic "English is my
second
language" speakers. None of these applied.
I suspect it was a mild Scottish accent. Many Scottish speakers of
standard English retain this vowel sound - I seem to recall people I
know from Edinburgh using it, even though most of their sounds were
fairly standard (meaning what used to be called RP).
|
I was leaning in that direction myself, but being a rank amateur, I wanted
to ask people who might actually know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:37 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"Luke" <lpgmx@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:cirb3j$5c7$1@news.freedom2surf.net...
| Quote: | John Mazor wrote:
Who is Gavin Essler?
A BBC journalist/news reader. Not sure if he pops up on the World
Service, which you are listening to.
|
Thanks. I'll have to pay more attention to the names. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:39 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"David" <david@dacha.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:4cf250bc3fdavid@dacha.freeuk.com...
| Quote: | In article <4150ea79$0$2665$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>, John Mazor
mazorj@erols.com> wrote:
"Wanderer" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:11772qgxvk6ts.82jrpmmg51o3$.dlg@40tude.net...
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 08:45:18 +0100, David wrote:
snip
British news presenters on the Beeb exhibit different accents;
many of them aren't even English.
That's a rather sweeping, and possibly quite incorrect, statement
to make. And why the distinction between British and English?
For the record, this was BBC World News on radio and the presenters
(there were several who did the boosh thing) had definite British
accents. I can't pin it down any closer than that. I usually can
pick out a pronounced (double entendre intended) Irish or Scot
accent, and some other obvious ones such as the Beatles'
Liverpudlian, Cockney, and ethnic "English is my second language"
speakers. None of these applied.
There might still be non-English British accents which aren't so
pronounced as to be obvious to foreigners (or, indeed, so pronounced as
to be not obvious to foreigners).
|
Indeed. The BBC seems to make it a point to have a mix of non-British
presenters, which makes sense when the program is titled "World News" and
marketed worldwide. Here in the U.S. the non-native born TV news anchor is
a rarity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:42 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"Mike Stevens" <michael.stevens@which.net> wrote in message
news:2rd8psF18dpinU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | John Mazor wrote:
If you care to document how "noine thewsand dawlers" springs from a
later era of the British branch of the English language, so much
removed that it could not possibly bear the loose attribution of
"Elizabethan," please do so and I shall be properly corrected.
Well, it's not so very different from the sort of super-upper-class
hyperlect spoken by people like the Duke of Edinburgh. But then I suppose
he counts as Elizabethan, depending on which Elizabeth you're thinking of
 . Come to think of it, our present HMQ spoke like that when she was
younger.
Off topic: What is the derivation of Midlothian? The naive
assumption is that there must be other Lothians not centrally
located, cf. Essex-Wessex, Norfolk-Suffolk, but it can't be that
simple, right?
Midlothian, East Lothian and West Lothian are nowadays all Unitary
Authorities in Scotland.
Back in history/mythology (my knowledge of Scottish history isn't good
enough to know where one ends and the other begins) it was a Kingdom in
its
own right. So Mid-Lothian presumably referred to the middle bit of that
Kingdom. At one time, Lothian was dominated by Angles and more English
than
Scottish, until the Picts conquered it in the seventh century AD. In the
twelfth century, the name "Scotland" referred to only one part of what the
name now means, and one of the other parts was Lothian.
|
That's what I love about jumping into newsgroups like this, instant
education on obscure matters that I find interesting. Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:43 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"bogus address" <bogus@purr.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:12710@purr.demon.co.uk...
| Quote: |
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian
Midlothian, Virginia is a tolerably short ride from where I live.
I think you underestimate the persistence of British culture and
language on your American cousins.
Off topic: What is the derivation of Midlothian? The naive assumption
is that there must be other Lothians not centrally located, cf. Essex-
Wessex, Norfolk-Suffolk, but it can't be that simple, right?
Midlothian is the county south of Edinburgh; it used to be called
Edinburghshire. There are also counties of West Lothian and East
Lothian. The whole area of Lothian is supposed to be named after
a semi-mythical (presumably Welsh) king called Loth. The lands of
the Marquis of Lothian are a rather different area, derived from
the holdings of the Abbey of Newbattle when it was privatized and
handed to the Ker family in the 17th century. The Lothian Coal
Company (their erstwhile family business) was mostly in Midlothian
and their family seat was a couple of miles from here at the old
abbey centre. Until last year the Marquis of Lothian was our feudal
superior, in a position to permit or refuse building alterations, so
the relationship was not purely linguistic.
As far as I know, there is no county in the US called Midlothian, but
the name is applied to a couple of towns. The most likely explanation
is that they got the name from Walter Scott's novel "The Heart of
Midlothian" (1818), one of the greatest hits of his entire career. The
fact that the name is applied to towns rather than county-sized areas
suggests that it was imposed by a Romantic-literature buff in authority
rather than adopted organically by a folk process.
|
Not knowing the history of the nearby Midlothian, that certainly is a
possibility. My only counter-argument would be that Eastern U.S. maps are
plentifully dotted with place names that clearly were carried over from the
settlers' native geography. (More recent settlements - hell, we're talking
about housing developers' marketing fantasies to create a cachet - carry
manufactured place and street names that are the real estate equivalent of
Ye Olde Antique Shoppe, but no one pays any attention to those.)
The other obvious pattern in place names from early American settlements is
Indian names. That's natural enough, but sometimes it leads to some
comically bizarre results. One of my relatives lived in a town along a
river wetlands area called Poquoson, which is Native American for swamp.
One imagines the scene: Some early English settlers ask a nearby native
what they call this area. "Poquoson" is the response from the Indian, who
wonders how these foreigners could be so stupid as to not know what a swamp
is. "Well, there you go, Poquoson it is! Write it down on the map, Harry." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Mazor
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:43 am
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" <bhk@dsl.co.uk> wrote in message
news:20040922.2323.57909snz@dsl.co.uk...
| Quote: | On Tuesday, in article
4150ea7b$0$2665$61fed72c@news.rcn.com> mazorj@erols.com
"John Mazor" wrote:
If you care to document how "noine thewsand dawlers" springs from a
later
era of the British branch of the English language, so much removed that
it
could not possibly bear the loose attribution of "Elizabethan," please
do so
and I shall be properly corrected.
To my mind, what you are trying to describe (and what I have heard in TV
programmes about these self-same "pockets of Elizabethan English" in the
USA) is akin to a West Country accent.
Since many of those new colonists were sentenced to "transportation for
life to the Virginias/Carolinas/Barbadoes", and often hung around for
months in and around Bristol, it's perhaps an assimilation of that accent.
In the same way that, a century or so later, the Orsetryleans were
generated from people who languished in prison hulks on the Essex marshes
for some years before finally gaining their transportation.
|
Thanks once again. I had read about this phenomenon in the eastern U.S.,
but what I heard on that afternoon 30 years ago has stuck vividly in my
memory ever since. It was like taking a short trip in a time machine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wanderer
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:19 pm
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:39:33 -0400, John Mazor wrote:
<snip>
| Quote: | Indeed. The BBC seems to make it a point to have a mix of non-British
presenters,
|
Err, they may be from ethnic minority backgrounds, but that doesn't
necessarily mean they are non-British.
--
wanderer at tesco dot net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:43 pm
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
In article <mt9pmr846jsl.1qfn550nayuer$.dlg@40tude.net>, Wanderer
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:39:33 -0400, John Mazor wrote:
snip
Indeed. The BBC seems to make it a point to have a mix of
non-British presenters,
Err, they may be from ethnic minority backgrounds, but that doesn't
necessarily mean they are non-British.
|
That some of the presenters might be British from ethnic minority
backgrounds doesn't preclude the possibility (or even the probability)
that some presenters are non-British. What's your point?
--
http://www.dacha.freeuk.com/joachim/08-0.htm
Through the Valley of Despair they came;
an innumerable surge of gross humanity... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wanderer
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 2:19 pm
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:25:21 +0100, David wrote:
<snip>
| Quote: | Is it really?
On the other hand, I have an exceedingly sustainable argument and I
still insist that you are trolling.
So, it seems that, even if we take your word about last resorts (which,
I hasten to assure more sensible readers, is not necessarily the case
but I can't be fagged to argue the toss on it), someone can be accused
of trolling by a poster very assured of the validity of his stance.
Indeed, if the person so accused is particularly well known to troll,
the strength of the accusers' argument would really have no bearing.
|
<snip>
| Quote: | No, quite the contrary: when Rob posted that "the antecedent to "them"
in your last statement is unclear, and could refer to the accents or
the presenters themselves", my unequivocal response was, "How true."
That you now take the line apparent in your last paragraph is just
another illustration of your desire to troll.
However, I acknowledge the lack of clarity because of regard to the
probable intelligence of the reader, not of the writer; were I assured
that all my readers had an acquaintance with English equal to mine, I
would be secure in the knowledge of its perfect clarity: as I would
have been had I wished to refer to the accents using a semi-colon and
substituted the word "those" for "them".
|
<snip>
| Quote: | I made the mistake of considering what you wrote and failed to find any
reason why you should ask about a non-existent distinction. I see know
that you were merely trolling.
|
<snip>
| Quote: | If any waters are muddy, my dear Wanderer, it is because you have
pissed in them.
|
<snip>
| Quote: | Okay, now tell me what do did mean by asking me "why the distinction
between British and English?" when I made no distinction other than the
correct and obvious one.
|
You posted a comment that was, on the face of it, open to
interpretation.
| Quote: | British news presenters on the Beeb exhibit different accents; many of
them aren't even English.
|
It was ostensibly ambiguous in its meaning. It may be concise, it may be
accurate, but it certainly ain't clear. Indeed, I would readily admit
that my first impression when I read it was that you were meaning that
many news presenters weren't English. Your intent is irrelevant. It was
how I read that comment.
It was only when I re-read the comment that your intent became clear. I
don't for one moment argue or dispute the accuracy. The initial impact
of your choice of phrase construction - at least for me - was to make me
think that you were expressing a view that I realised was not what you
intended. I repeat, there is some ambiguity.
I attempted to draw your attention to that ambiguity.You have since
resorted to literary irrelevance in an attempt to justify your position,
as well as accusing me of trolling. Your comments above say much more
about you than they do about me. In the end you have demonstrated that
you are apparently well-educated, but are sadly lacking in intelligence
or wisdom to make use of that education. I see no further merit in
continuing this discussion.
--
wanderer at tesco dot net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nero
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:15 pm
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
"Mike Stevens" <michael.stevens@which.net> wrote in message news:<2rd8psF18dpinU1@uni-berlin.de>...
| Quote: | Midlothian, East Lothian and West Lothian are nowadays all Unitary
Authorities in Scotland.
|
In Victorian/Edwardian times these were often referred to in
guidebooks and atlases as Edinburghshire, Haddingtonshire and
Linlithgowshire respectively. I have a suspicion these names did not
trip easily from the Scottish tongue and I wonder if they were mainly
an attempt to Anglicize ?
Neil |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wanderer
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:41 pm
Post subject: Re: American British pronunciations |
|
|
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:43:47 +0100, David wrote:
| Quote: | In article <mt9pmr846jsl.1qfn550nayuer$.dlg@40tude.net>, Wanderer
me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:39:33 -0400, John Mazor wrote:
snip
Indeed. The BBC seems to make it a point to have a mix of
non-British presenters,
Err, they may be from ethnic minority backgrounds, but that doesn't
necessarily mean they are non-British.
That some of the presenters might be British from ethnic minority
backgrounds doesn't preclude the possibility (or even the probability)
that some presenters are non-British.
|
Did I say otherwise? I think not.
| Quote: | What's your point?
|
Are you being deliberately obtuse? JM suggested that the BBC employed a
mix of non-British presenters. Are you or JM privy to information that
would support that claim?
A more accurate observation would be that the BBC seems to make a point
of using a mix of presenters from different ethnic backgrounds.
--
wanderer at tesco dot net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in