Research or research

[johnofgwent]

and there was i thinking this was another bogus ph.d thesis created from study of other peoples work with no original input

[Thomas]

Interesting fact.

Dicken's "A Tale of Two Cities" was first serialized in two local  English newspapers.

It was the Bicester Times, it was the Worcester Times.

( feck i havent even heard any decent jokes lately either. )

[Thomas]

Quite frankly, does all that verbiage matter that much...?

Only within the context of this thread.

Toots started the thread complaining about the difference in pronunciation of a word in american and english , and it went from there.

I know you cant help yourself at times , but you seems to jump into the thread making an often contradictory and sneering point in post 17 about  pronunciation and meaning , while again lecturing on "correctness" in use of words , which went against what i was saying so i replied in kind.

As yet you havent really answered much of what i was saying , nor backed up what you originally said in post 17 except to make vague empty often contradictory comments so there you go.

If it doesnt matter to you why reply to the thread or correct what you deem as incorrect usage of words?

[Thomas]

I was born in 1981. The English I was mainly brought up with and educated in was mainly 1950-60 British colonial usage — with plenty of local exposure to other modern European languages. As I studied modern history, anything before the 15th century is mostly foreign territory...

The point and question remains the same irrespective of the time.

You are merely nine years apart from me in age , and 450 miles in distance , but the english we were both brought up with and to a lesser degree educated in might as well be two differing languages light years apart.

[patman post]

sure and other languages absorb english words as they come into contact with it.

What do you mean depends on context and location ?

So ( as has happened in the past) if a yank on an english forum spells colour as color he is wrong?

What if borkie goes on yank forums and says he is on holiday instead of vacation?

You use language as you are brought up to use it , not because of some obscure rules in another country , and over time , language changes as it comes into contact with new ideas and regions.

Nothing stays static , and rules in one country dont necessarily apply in another .


So yes it does depend on context and region , but also the fact context and regions can and do overlap  as per my examples. So which is correct?

Quite frankly, does all that verbiage matter that much...?

[patman post]

so if patman post in 10th century hackney wanted to flog a horse to cromwell up in 10th century manc land

Modern english" i will sell you the horse that pulls my wagon"

10th century patman "Ic selle the that hors the draegeth minne waegn"

10th century cromwell would have said " Ek mun selja ther hrossit er dregr vagn mine"

Which was the correct use of words in english of the time?

You either dont know what you are talking about , or as more likely l being your ususal derogatory  sneering self.

...and of course you have answered in part your own sneering post in your third line.

I was born in 1981. The English I was mainly brought up with and educated in was mainly 1950-60 British colonial usage — with plenty of local exposure to other modern European languages. As I studied modern history, anything before the 15th century is mostly foreign territory...

[Thomas]

Depends on context and location. The spelling of or- or our-ending (or ise- or ize-) words is unlikely to cause confusion, but if writing for a US audience I'd use US spelling and grammar — though if you read the New Yorker, it seems to enjoy it own conventions.

In computer (and much modern technical) terminology, US spelling tends to rule.

In more normal times we could vacate our home to go on holiday (even though — as you point out — the time may not be a holy day). Which proves English absorbs words from around the globe, often as fashion dictates...

sure and other languages absorb english words as they come into contact with it.

What do you mean depends on context and location ?

So ( as has happened in the past) if a yank on an english forum spells colour as color he is wrong?

What if borkie goes on yank forums and says he is on holiday instead of vacation?

You use language as you are brought up to use it , not because of some obscure rules in another country , and over time , language changes as it comes into contact with new ideas and regions.

Nothing stays static , and rules in one country dont necessarily apply in another .


So yes it does depend on context and region , but also the fact context and regions can and do overlap  as per my examples. So which is correct?

[patman post]

so whats the correct spelling of colour? Colour or color?

Using incorrect words and spellings etc is all part of language change.

Do you go on vacation or holiday? What is the correct word?

Depends on context and location. The spelling of or- or our-ending (or ise- or ize-) words is unlikely to cause confusion, but if writing for a US audience I'd use US spelling and grammar — though if you read the New Yorker, it seems to enjoy it own conventions.

In computer (and much modern technical) terminology, US spelling tends to rule.

In more normal times we could vacate our home to go on holiday (even though — as you point out — the time may not be a holy day). Which proves English absorbs words from around the globe, often as fashion dictates...

[Barry]

Edit to add toots , in my scots glaswegian , the emphasis syllable in the word "research" is on the first syllable.

i say it something like "RREEE ....seerrrch" ( rolling the RRRss)

You callous heathen, Tommy!
Back shortly, off to the john.

[Thomas]

Can't say it worries me over much how words are pronounced so long as the meaning is clear. It doesn't take much working out to understand what different English language speakers mean when they use such words as momentarily and presently.

What is distracting (or entertaining on here) is the use of incorrect words — elude for allude, disinterested for uninterested, flaunt for flout, pacific for specific, of for have (as in could of, should of, would of), etc.

Of course, we can all be victims of productive smelling (as a frequent iPad user, I have fallen foul/fowl of this meself)...

so if patman post in 10th century hackney wanted to flog a horse to cromwell up in 10th century manc land

Modern english" i will sell you the horse that pulls my wagon"

10th century patman "Ic selle the that hors the draegeth minne waegn"

10th century cromwell would have said " Ek mun selja ther hrossit er dregr vagn mine"

Which was the correct use of words in english of the time?

You either dont know what you are talking about , or as more likely l being your ususal derogatory  sneering self.

...and of course you have answered in part your own sneering post in your third line.

[Thomas]

Can't say it worries me over much how words are pronounced so long as the meaning is clear. It doesn't take much working out to understand what different English language speakers mean when they use such words as momentarily and presently.

What is distracting (or entertaining on here) is the use of incorrect words — elude for allude, disinterested for uninterested, flaunt for flout, pacific for specific, of for have (as in could of, should of, would of), etc.

Of course, we can all be victims of productive smelling (as a frequent iPad user, I have fallen foul/fowl of this meself)...

so whats the correct spelling of colour? Colour or color?

Using incorrect words and spellings etc is all part of language change.

Do you go on vacation or holiday? What is the correct word?

[Thomas]

I'm not into running with the masses so acceptance isn't likely. Someone has to stand up against Americanisation.

Ok but surely you agree thats a wee bit ironic saying that to me toots?

400 years ago or thereabouts , the dominant language in scotland was still scottish ( gaidhlig) , and now today becuase of the union merely 1% now speak it as an everyday language.

English has become scotlands language in that time , but now the english language in scotland is morphing into something else. There are now crys for "scots" english to be taught in schools , and of course scots gaidhlig is making a comeback to a small degree,  but i fear it will be very difficult to ressurect.

Eventually i believe scots english will become a seprate language  , just as american english will develop.

During that time your language wil change in your own country.

You can make a stand , but usually things like migration , cultural osmosis  , economics etc etc will all play a part as history shows and change languages.

[patman post]

Can't say it worries me over much how words are pronounced so long as the meaning is clear. It doesn't take much working out to understand what different English language speakers mean when they use such words as momentarily and presently.

What is distracting (or entertaining on here) is the use of incorrect words — elude for allude, disinterested for uninterested, flaunt for flout, pacific for specific, of for have (as in could of, should of, would of), etc.

Of course, we can all be victims of productive smelling (as a frequent iPad user, I have fallen foul/fowl of this meself)...

[T00ts]

i know toots , but you have to accept how language works and how it is always changing.

I'm not into running with the masses so acceptance isn't likely. Someone has to stand up against Americanisation.

[Thomas]

Actually think Thomas is correct it long ago escaped from these shores,the Beeb ah yes and Mr Cholmondley Warner in the old news reels.

I'm old enough to remember the newsreaders wearing an evening suit and any women who appeared wore an expensive gown,the majority of people in this country never spoke received English in fact during war time years Wilfred Pickles was pushed as presenter so the Germanscouldnt imitate his Yorkshire accent.

As an aside there was some fear expressed in the US some years ago that Spanish speakers will overtake the English speakers in numbers.

Do love English though and it's words.

"english "  though cromwell didint escape from these shores.

It started life as a language called "indo european " thousands of years ago. Then these people took it to central europe and it morphed into germanic. Then it moved westward and morhped into west germanic.

When it reached southern britain , eventually it became anglo saxon. Then old english.

Then the normans came along and it changed into middle english. ( back in the 13th century , there was an old english language rights movement fighting against middle english still recorded today at oxford university)

Then the modern english speakers took it around the world to places such as america , where it s journey continues as it morphs into something else.

No one can  stop its natural progression as im sure you agree cromwell , and we are reaching the stage where england no longer controls the language and it now belongs to other non english people who will eventually call it something else and develop their own rules.