Thursday Next Posted September 28, 2012 Report Share Posted September 28, 2012 We call them redheads. And I'm pretty sure any anti-ginger sentiment in the US is just a joke popularized by South Park. And just as a practical matter I actually prefer "expiration" or "best-by" dates over "sell-by" dates because if I get a gallon of milk that says "sell by October 15" or whatever I don't know how long past that date it's okay to use. *Edit* - Thursday ninja'd me. Ginja'd! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted September 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 28, 2012 We have both on packaging where appropriate. The "Sell by" is a "after this point it'll be beyond its best/freshest, but it's still edible and won't kill the customer". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted September 28, 2012 Report Share Posted September 28, 2012 Honestly we should all blame Webster for all this ridiculousness. Spellings, words and even grammar to some extent were modified because he thought 'I can simplify language for a bunch of people'. I mean you can understand errors such as Aluminum from Aluminium due to the telegraph and communication difficulties. But to forcibly change the language due to the strength of one's ego and desire to simply when it's not quite that is fairly stupid. Either adopt a more universal SI system and get people to collaborate and come up with a simplistic version or leave it. Honestly the way things work today thanks to a lot of transatlantic communication is that British and American English are consistently borrowing from each other that at some point in the future it'll be fairly similar outside of the dialect. I can't say it's due to the invasion of British actors in mainstream Hollywood and broadcast since that's been going on since the days of Chaplin and Grant but it definitely is to do with writers crossing over. I for one would prefer a uniformity in grammar and usage with dialectical differences. Damn you OED for taking forever to come out with a dictionary, I honestly wouldn't be surprised that if they did come out with a new edition it could be adopted by universities in the US as well because of the growing fondness of wanting to use English as in the UK (of course not uniformly because not everyone actually gets the chance to go to a university). If anything we might actually see certain societal attributes associated with language translating across borders. At the end of the day what really separates the two languages outside of colloquialisms and dialects is the dictionary reference point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted September 28, 2012 Report Share Posted September 28, 2012 Here's an odd Americanism: "druthers" Had no idea what it meant the first few times I heard it. How common is it in the US? I pretty much never hear it up North here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted September 29, 2012 Report Share Posted September 29, 2012 I've never heard anyone use it. Seems like an outdated term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted September 29, 2012 Report Share Posted September 29, 2012 Yeah, I have never heard that before. I mean, I have heard what you could potentially write as "I druther not", but that's really just running together "I'd rather not", not really its own word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted October 12, 2012 Report Share Posted October 12, 2012 Comedy writer's rant. http://danielmaier.posterous.com/stop-american-creep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 That was pretty good. I couldn't help but read it in Yahtzee's voice. However, I will say this: I am not willing to give up on is. Yes, Coldplay is touring. The noun "Coldplay" is singular, it's a band. If you wanted to say "the members of Coldplay are touring" for some reason then yes, that's plural. Coldplay is an entity distinct from its constituent members, as are companies and governments and sports teams and whatever else, and so when talking about the entity you use singular verbs. It's funny to me that he was willing to concede "in back of" (though I'm sure it was largely tongue-in-cheek) since even as an American I cringe when I hear that. It just sounds so uneducated, like something a 5 year old would say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted October 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 But there's four members of Coldplay, and anything above one is plural. Without the members of Coldplay there is no Coldplay so it's not like it's wholly separate. Also it helps create a distinction too; Manchester is not having a good year. Manchester are not having a good year. One of them is referring to Manchester the place, of which there is only one. And the other to the football team, which is composed of glod knows how many people cos I don't know much about football but it's above 11 thus a plural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 Without the members of Coldplay there is no Coldplay so it's not like it's wholly separate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 My car is made up of parts too, but I wouldn't say "My car are at the shop." There is one Coldplay, that is only manifest when the members are all together. I think it depends if you're referring to the band or the people in it. "We are Coldplay. Coldplay is here." Also, both Manchester the place and the team are made up of the people therein, unless you're talking about something directly affecting the geography of the place. If you were saying the place was having a bad year, you'd probably mean the people, not that the area was shrinking or something. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted October 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 Well done, I'm from Yorkshire. A fact you could. of figured out a while back. A car is composed of many fundemental particles if you really wanted to get down to it. But it's not people. Unlike Coldplay. You would say Jim, Bob, Dick n Harry are going to play at wembley, so why do they become one being when they are called "Coldplay"? My only theory is allows it to be impersonal. "Disembodied brand is pumping chemicals" instead of "Hundreds of workers and executives are pumping chemicals". Personally I'd be annoyed that American grammar dictates I lose individuality upon joining a group. And yes you're correct on Manchester, bad example as it would be "are" in both cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) They become one Coldplay because like I said, there is only one of the band. You could say "people are doing something" but that's because it refers to a group of persons - a plural. Proper nouns are normally singular though - because they refer to a unique entity and not a class of them. There aren't several Coldplays (at least referred to as a group of them when one says "Coldplay,") there is only one. If it was a plural, they'd be "The Coldplays," which would then make sense with "are". As for referring to place or team names, I'd say it's singular, at least when referring to the overall group. In sports and politics, over here at least, they tend to be referred to in singular form with "is" though. "China is expanding" (or "has" ambitions, rather than "have"), or "[sports team] is [winning/losing/improving/etc]". Edited October 13, 2012 by fuchikoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 I'm not really bothered by the 'is' and 'are' stuff, in general. There are times when either can look odd; it all depends on context. It's when I see it in contractions, that it can look odd to me. For example, 'there's two ways this can go down', if written out fully, becomes 'there is two ways this can go down'. Of course, it's not meant to be read fully, so it's OK. Just that my brain always picks up on it. In the same way, my brain feels weird about 'times like this' and 'times like these', without either being inherently wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 It doesn't really bother me much either... I'm just trying to share the rationale that probably governs it in North America. Linguistic prescriptivism is fun, but ultimately futile. Contractions reminded me one thing that really stands out to me is illogical plurals. It's hard to think of good examples since my brain just doesn't work that way and refuses to remember most of them, but I've noticed folks from the East cost here will say things like "anywheres you've been" and my parser starts turning out stuff like "because I've been to more than one anywhere?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) Yeah, I wasn't directing the being 'bothered' thing at anyone here. More at the guy who wrote the blog, but even then, he was being a bit facetious, too. Reminds me, actually, there's a line in Hanna where Jason Flemyng says "...is your mum and dad still together?" and it sounds weird, because he's 'bohemian', not exactly poorly-educated. It's a funny scene, if you were interested in seeing it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QErz-lzzcr4 Edited October 13, 2012 by Hot Heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted October 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19929249 A follow up to the "Britishisms". I got reminded by it due to the "fall/autumn" in the status post. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRevanchist Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 If someone in America is telling you they are using at least 1/4 of those, then those people must be British. I can't even read half of those words and not read them without a British accent. That article is just spouting a bunch of BS. DON'T GET FOOLED BY THE MAN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 Is wonky even Britishism? The rest certainly are, except Autumn which I've always heard used in the US, just not as frequently as Fall. Wonky, though, I don't specifically remember hearing as a child, but I also don't have the idea that it's specifically British. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted October 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 I thought US food was meant to be cheap?Also you guys don't have squash? (Mainly inferring that from her having to explain how it works)Also you guys don't put coins in..oh wait dollar notes I guess it wouldn't work You guys got the magnets set up instead then?Also she starts with a Morrisons trolley but is buying from ASDA... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I have no idea if US food is cheap and what is meant by that. Cheap produce? Cheap meat? Cheap fruit? Cheap processed shit? Cheap grains? There's way too many factors there and it also varies depending on where you live in the US. I live in Seattle, our cost of living is high as fuck here, everything here is more expensive. Also wait, was squash the stuff you mix with water in the video? Or the vegetable? We don't have magnets for our carts. We don't have any security for our carts for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted October 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Cheap food is what I mean by cheap food. Things you eat. Squash is the stuff you mix with water. I'm pretty sure squash the vegetable is American in origin anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Yeah, I don't think I've ever been to a grocery store with security on the carts. The closest I've seen are the strollers at the mall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 We have stuff you mix with water. Not so much anything I can think of in your "squash" form. Anyways, I bring up multiple types of food because there's processing, export/import, and industries to consider. There's also different types of grocery stores here. I assume you have high end grocery stores over there, too? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 The Safeway chain in Canada, and some other chains have used coin-lock carts. They just take a quarter, rather than a whole dollar or more. I think there have also been versions that take two quarters, and maybe ones that take $1 by now since that's still doable here... but I'm not sure because I haven't really used them in ages. It seemed like more of an early-mid 90s thing and now most carts are "free" again. (Free to wander parking lots and ditches it seems...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.