The Britishisation of American English

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19670686

by noashx • 14 years ago

27 82 14 years ago

bbc.co.uk

Maybe eventually the Britishisation will extend to returning the 'u' to colour so I make far, far fewer typos.

Although it's interesting see the cross-pollenisation that seems to be happening linguistically thanks to media shifting both ways across the pond. Often used to be American imported media flowing into Britain with very few things leaving, but it seems like there's more American Doctor Who fans than British ones now.

npsimons• 14 years ago

I still think it's funny that for a culture that was so at odds with the French that their slang for toilet is named after a line of French kings, they still spell things like the French ("colour" being one example, "theatre" another).

As to Doctor Who, well, it's more soap opera than science fiction these days (and has been for a while), so it's no surprise that it's wildly popular in the states.

heyitsnick• 14 years ago

> I still think it's funny that for a culture that was so at odds with the French ... they still spell things like the French ("colour" being one example, "theatre" another).

But the word descends directly from the French language; 30% of English is from the French, it's largest influence (another 30% is from latin, 30% from Germanic, and the rest from other sources). So it's not that we are choosing to 'spell things like the French': the word IS French, as are countless other words. It's our biggest source of vocab.

JumpCrisscross• 14 years ago

The reason nearly a third of English words derive from French (the same proportion as directly from Latin, which the romantic languages, e.g. French, derive from) is because the British Isles were largely conquered by William the Conqueror (to the Brits) in the 11th century.

TamDenholm• 14 years ago

"Typo" would be another one, I'd always say "Spelling mistake" instead. I had no experience of the word "typo" until i started noticing it in American TV.

_dps• 14 years ago

For those who first encounter the word "typo" indirectly as TamDenholm did, it's worth noting that a typo is not just any spelling mistake; it is a mis-spelling rendered in a type-set text and arising not through the author's ignorance of spelling but rather through a mis-operation of the typing apparatus (often arising through hasty typing). For elaboration, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographical_error.

If one believed (erroneously) that "spelling" were correctly rendered "speling", that would not be a typo but a spelling mistake. On the other hand, if one rendered it "speling" because of a finger slip on the second press of the "l" key then it would be a typo.

</pedantic clarification>

Vivtek5• 14 years ago

Cute. Their sidebar isn't all that accurate, though. "Called Joe" a Britishism? 'Fraid not, chaps. Booking a flight? Also not that British. And "an American would say" is more than a little offensive, although surely not intentionally.

Also they missed "wanker" - which has been used a lot lately. It's a good word.

Jabbles2• 14 years ago

Whilst teaching someone programming the other day I realised that the overloaded word "call" causes great problems. I had to correct "a function called main" to "a function named main", in order to make sense of "calling a function".

Before then I had been unaware that I use the word for different meanings.

eroded• 14 years ago

>"an American would say" is more than a little offensive

Wait, what? What's offensive about that?

mhurron• 14 years ago

Well, an American would say it's offensive, but they're all just a bunch of fucking cunts so just tell them to piss off.

Internationalized for the Limeys.

malvim2• 14 years ago

Non-American here, and I failed to see how "an American would say" is offensive. It seems to me that it's just pointing out the differences, which doesn't ring as offensive at all. Would you care to explain? (I am genuinely asking this question out of curiosity, not criticizing)

Also, +1 on "wanker". It is indeed a good word.

Vivtek5• 14 years ago

Sorry - in politics, the worst possible thing one American can do to another is to imply that they're not really American. I'm a liberal from Indiana - that may or may not mean anything to you - but somebody identifying me as a not-quite-American based on something I say that maybe sounds too posh really raises my hackles, even as I realize, full well, that it's a really stupid reaction.

Even then, I didn't really notice it until I'd read three things I say that an American wouldn't. Dammit. It's like the time that chick in Germany tried to tell me I don't speak English, just American. I may not know everything, but by God and St. George I am the utter master of my dialect and precisely how and when it differs from whatever we Anglophones deem "standard".

dpark12• 14 years ago

Also:

Bit - Not at all uncommon in the US

Sell-by date - Also common in the US. It has different connotations than "expiration date", which is why a lot of grocery stores have started using it. Sometimes packages will even have separate "sell by" and "expiration" (also "use or freeze by") dates.

Metrosexual, Gastropub - These are not Britishisms. They're just recent words that happen to have originated in Britain. That's not at all the same thing. Britishism implies that the word is (or at least was) stereotypically British.

itsmequinn• 14 years ago

You mean Britishization? USA USA

diazamet3• 14 years ago

I think in British English it is more common to say 'best before date' rather than 'sell-by date'.

One 'Britishisation' I wish the US would get is 'I couldn't care less', meaning I care about some thing as little as possible, yet in the US they insist on say 'I could care less' which makes no sense.

Jabbles2• 14 years ago

'best before date' and 'sell-by date' refer to different things and are usually separated by a few days.

e.g. http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01420/date_14201...

diazamet3• 14 years ago

Yes but in general conversation people would normally just refer to the 'best before' date. Also, not everything has a 'display until' or 'sell-by' date.

freehunter6• 14 years ago

I don't think that's British vs American, that's more proper grammar vs improper grammar. You wouldn't hear anyone of any stature seriously trying to suggest that "could care less" is American English. My opinion is that it's one of those things people hear spoken more than they see written and the tendency to say "could'n care less" (without the hard stop on the 't'). Kind of like something I see on HN quite often, "kind've".

diazamet3• 14 years ago

Granted, it's not necessarily a UK vs US -ism but I come across it most often on US websites.

5teev• 14 years ago

If you think of "I could care less" as sarcasm, it makes more sense, i.e., the speaker couldn't really care less. (If I recall, this was the typical usage when I first started hearing this phrase decades ago.)

sarabob• 14 years ago

AIUI the USA version is "I could care less, if I really tried hard."

dpark12• 14 years ago

I agree this is just a question of improper grammar. However , it's fast becoming an Americanism. I think it's probably more common without the "n't" (or even just "n'") at this point.

> Kind of like something I see on HN quite often, "kind've".

SideburnsOfDoom10• 14 years ago

What do you mean by "stature"?

I'm convinced that British people never say "I could care less" when they mean that they don't care, but that some American people do. British people say instead "I couldn't care less", which is a more accurate statement.

How does that differ from "I could care less" being a characteristically American turn of phrase?

nollidge6• 14 years ago

It's got nothing to do with grammar. "I could care less" is a perfectly grammatical sentence - it follows all the rules of English sentence construction. Similarly, "colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is also perfectly grammatical, it just doesn't make any semantic sense.

nickt• 14 years ago

Relevant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw

yardie• 14 years ago

To my American ears couldn't and less are a double negative. Like here is my level of concern and I can't go below that. OTOH, "could care less", means my level of disregard can approach -∞

dpark12• 14 years ago

Less isn't a negative. It's a comparative.

"I couldn't care less" means "I am incapable of caring any less" aka "I care as little as possible". "I could care less" means "I do not care as little as possible" aka "I care a little".

If your level of concern is not zero, then I suppose you "could care less", but that means you do care, which is not the sentiment normally intended by the phrase.

jonathansizz• 14 years ago

Also, 'a way to go' & 'anyway' versus 'a ways to go' & 'anyways'; 'take it with a pinch of salt' versus 'take it with a grain of salt' (miserly Americans!).

On the other hand, I generally prefer the American -ization versus -isation.

nollidge6• 14 years ago

It definitely doesn't make sense, but I think it's probably a result of a few folks eliding the "n't" on "couldn't" when speaking, then the phrase getting interpreted by the listener as a single phonic unit "could care less", which carries the semantic definition "couldn't care less".

It's just that the listener's brain understands the speaker based on the context without needing to deconstruct the clause and notice the elision, and so the gestalt phrase is what's remembered, and, later, recalled.

cbs• 14 years ago

"that sort of London glottal stop", dropping the T in words like "important" or "Manhattan".

So I agree with the premise of this article, but the glottal stop is found in many regional American accents.

The internet removes language barriers from lines drawn on the ground, and this small difference has sped up a still very, very slow process started by television. Language is evolving towards a single shared language, right now we can see the regional differences falling away between nations. TV has dissolved much of the regional differences within the US. The difference is still there, and probably always will be, but its a lot weaker than it was a few decades ago.

untakenusername• 14 years ago

The use of the glottal stop for the /t/ in "Manhattan" is how New York City natives born throughout the 20th century generally pronounced it, other than possibly elite class speakers. And you're correct that such glottalization occurs in other contexts in many regional US accents. The suggestion that this might be a result of recent British English influence is absurd.

Vivtek5• 14 years ago

It's actually more likely to be a holdover from very old British English influence - the Irish and Scots press-ganged white slaves who fled into the hills of Virginia and became the rednecks of coal country. I know that's where I get most of my dialect, even though I grew up in Indiana (so I also get a Blues-Brothersish Chicagoan avoidance of theta, to end up with that unique Hoosier accent that non-obsessives don't notice).

London doesn't have a monopoly on glottal stops.

ArbitraryLimits• 14 years ago

I grew up in Minnesota and moved to southern California as an adult, and after listening very hard for any trace of an accent out here, the only thing I've noticed is that Caucasians who grew up here and went to AP english classes enunciate their T's very clearly. It's kind of weird because that kind of kid in the upper Midwest is very careful to turn the T into a glottal stop, to fit in with everyone else.

qwertzlcoatl• 14 years ago

Source? Labov's Atlas of North American Atlas says that changes among dialects in the US are more pronounced now than they were 50 years ago. If we're not even converging among ourselves, how can we all be possibly converging in any meaningful way with people overseas? It's simply not documented in any systematic way.

Gormo2• 14 years ago

There are a lot of incorrect details in the article, although the premise is mostly accurate; the use of "spot on", for example, is certainly increasing on this side of the Atlantic, along with other phrases that aren't mentioned, such as "bog standard".

But a lot of the article's examples aren't quite right: "to book" a room or table has always been in use here; it just sounds more colloquial than "reserve", so the latter is what would be more likely printed in hotel brochures and restaurant menus. Conversely, "expiration date" is used in formal or ersatz-formal language, but "sell by" is what's actually usually printed on supermarket labels.

Some of the items ignore subtle distinctions in the way certain phrases are used. For example, there's always been "washing up" in America, but it's invariably done before dinner, not afterwards.

vacri• 14 years ago

I wonder if there'll be agreement on 'irony'. In British English, the ironic happening must necessarily be unintentional. It doesn't have to be unknown, just go against the intentions of the act (eg: an anticrime bill that the beat police know will raise crime)

In contrast, Americans often use 'irony' in an intentional manner. Selecting an ironic t-shirt to wear. Or the phrase that clued me into this: "The photographer has arranged the model's foot ironically".

smcl2• 14 years ago

There's a good semi-serious rant by comedian Brian Limond on the reverse (though I have a feeling that there are plenty of other rants on this topic):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnGPgCVJUsI

I would claim not to mind it, but when I think for a minute I realise that the spelling of various words like "fibre" annoy me, as well as the mm/dd/yy format (and "November 15th" instead of "November the 15th"), and describing football/sports teams as "it" instead of "they" (i.e. "Real Madrid is on an amazing run of form" vs "Real Madrid are on an amazing run of form").

_b8r0• 14 years ago

I really wanted to like Limmy's show, I really did, but after 3 episodes I found I'd barely laughed, and even then only at Deedee's overanalysis of what the hardest item in his kitchen was.

smcl2• 14 years ago

Yeah some of the sketches are a bit tough, but overall I like him. His twitter is ridiculous though, worth following for at least a week or so - you'll see what I mean.

jacques_chester2• 14 years ago

There's also the distinct English dialects spoken in the various former colonies. These tend to more closely follow the original English and so, by way of analogy with a certain international institution, people talk about Commonwealth English.

It's interesting how the entire shape of Australian English was set by the early settlers -- you can still distinct dialects of Strine spoken in different parts of the country. Or the way that the vowel-lotto that New Zealanders play with "Unglush" has a lot to do with the heavy settlement of NZ by Scots.

I guess eventually we'll all speak the same English. It'll give the French something even bigger to hate. Manifique.

Gmo• 14 years ago

I know it was a tongue in the cheek comment, but if you want to attack the "French", try to at least do it correctly.

It is "magnifique".

jacques_chester2• 14 years ago

Quelle horreur, my mother will be mortified.

(I know I am)

droithomme• 14 years ago

I have acquired many of these by means of exchanging email with British customers. It's nothing worth getting anyone's knickers in a twist about, I rather fancy some of the phrases. Cheers.

grose• 14 years ago

"Unlike in the UK, there is no anti-ginger prejudice in the US, she says - Americans think of warm, comforting things like gingerbread."

As someone who grew up in America (with not ginger, but slightly reddish hair) I find this to very untrue. There's even a whole South Park episode* making fun of gingers, and there's few things more American than that. Maybe it's a relatively new thing, but I doubt many young Americans think of warm ginger bread.

* http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s09e11-ginger-...

a1k0n• 14 years ago

I grew up in the Midwest, and that south park episode was the first I'd ever heard of ginger-bashing. Or the term "ginger" for that matter.

nollidge6• 14 years ago

The gingerbread comment is silly, but I think that any supposed anti-ginger prejudice in the U.S. is firmly tongue-in-cheek. I don't think I've ever heard anyone seriously disparage red-haired people here.

arethuza• 14 years ago

Depends on which part of the UK - Scotland has the highest proportion of redheads of anywhere in world (13%) according to wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair

[Scots are often rather pugnaciously proud of their red hair.]

tokenadult• 14 years ago

From the article: "She sees this as clearly tied to the publication in the US of the first Harry Potter book. Dozens of words and phrases were changed for the American market, but ginger slipped through, as did snog (meaning 'to kiss amorously') - though that has not proved so popular." I think this is one of the correctly described mechanisms for the spread of British terms into American English. The Harry Potter novels are wildly popular here in the United States, and as I recall the later novels (which were published simultaneously worldwide to prevent pirate editions) were less edited to match United States usage than the earlier United States editions of the novels.

"The use of university, rather than college or school, for example, may well be used by Americans to make sure they are understood outside the country." I definitely consciously use the term "university" (which was the proper name for my undergraduate institution of higher education) when I want to be understood by Canadians, who don't read "college" with the same implication as Americans do

Here in Minnesota, anyone can regularly hear BBC broadcasts by rebroadcasting on Minnesota Public Radio, and there are other parts of the United States where BBC is available over the air, besides much of British broadcasting being available over the Internet.

For college-educated adults, a great way to pick up interesting bits of British usage in English is reading The Economist, one of my favorite sources for new submissions here to HN. For many young people across the United States, one big source of exposure to (regional) British speech is participation in youth soccer programs, which are often coached by British expatriates.

For all that, we would have to describe the expected future path of English to be further koineization, with more simplification of structure and worldwide spread of useful words and phrases, as an astounding variety of mash-ups of second-language speakers use English as an interlanguage all over the world. In other words, sometimes the American way of speaking will join the pattern of world English, and sometimes the British, and no doubt sometimes Caribbean or African or south Asian or southeast Asian varieties of English will join in as well.

Gormo2• 14 years ago

The "university" vs. "college" usage in America is also influenced by the increasing trend of local community colleges initiating four-year degree programs and dropping the word "community" from their names.

Despite offering a limited set of bachelor's degrees, these schools are still regarded as somewhat low in prestige, so those who obtained their bachelor's degrees from more traditional institutions have begun to emphasize the difference by saying "university" instead of "college".

IIRC, the distinction in usage arose from the fact that when the first "institutions of higher learning" were founded in America, they were initially quite small, and intended to merge together into larger universities as additional institutions were subsequently founded; instead the individual colleges ended up expanding as independent institutions and ultimately dividing themselves into multiple "departments". It wasn't until the 19th century that the term "university" began to be used by American institutions.

dpark12• 14 years ago

> The same thing might be influencing a trend that Yagoda has spotted for Americans to use the day, month, year format for dates - 26/9/12 rather than 9/26/12.

Is this actually happening? I see YY(YY)/MM/DD sometimes (that's what I use, albeit with hyphens), but I've never seen an American use DD/MM/YY in the US.

kbenson• 14 years ago

My wife always rolls her eyes when I fill out forms with dates in YYYY-MM-DD (ISO 8601) format. I feel it's my duty to help in this small way to liberate people from crappy date formats. :)

For electronic record keeping, the benefits over the American standard of m/d/yy or the British standard of d/m/yy are plain.

dpark12• 14 years ago

My wife doesn't seem to care too much, though I think she's asked me about it before. The big benefit is that it's nonambiguous. No one is going to see YYYY-MM-DD and be confused about the date (YY-MM-DD is a different story for at least a few more months). Natural sorting in electronic systems is a huge plus, though.

Vivtek5• 14 years ago

What disappoints me most about this article, though, is that it failed to point out why this is happening. More than any time in history, people using different dialects of English are in regular, day-to-day contact on the Internet. We may not share time zones (especially those crazy Aussies) but it's telling that we turn out to like each other a lot, and trade our favorite words and insults.

So in closing, the authors of the article are a bunch of wankers.

mc32• 14 years ago

What a naff article. That girl in Gilligan's island wasn't called "ginger" for nothing.

Sodders!

The Britishisation of American English

Related Stories