BS: Language Pet Peeves

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: leeneia
Date: 13 May 20 - 01:45 AM

I just googled "maps of the British Isles", and google brought up 20 maps. Ireland was in every one.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 May 20 - 02:11 AM

Geographically, The British Isles include Ireland. You seem to be confusing The British Isles with The United Kingdom. If you google ‘maps of the United Kingdom‘, the island of Ireland will be included, but the ROI will be indicated as separate from the UK- often by the absence of detail.

From britannica.com

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 May 20 - 07:57 AM

Sorry, Leeneia, I should have said, “Are you sure you aren’t conflating The British Isles with The United Kingdom?”.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 May 20 - 09:35 AM

Yeah, no, I'm way better at being explained to than being told!

The English language needs a one-word word for something as common as "member of the armed forces" - if we can't use Soldier any more, what is being proposed? Warrior doesn't work as it includes fighters who aren't in the armed forces. Patsy is an opinion, not a descriptor. So...?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: meself
Date: 13 May 20 - 10:27 AM

Mrzy, just wondering where you grew up, hearing "soldier" as such a generic term? I've never encountered it that way, so I'm assuming it is, to some degree, a regional usage ... ?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 May 20 - 10:35 AM

Mrrzy, I think our common language is dividing us again, and you’re assuming that US-ian practices and standards apply elsewhere outside the US.

Sorry, but it just ain’t so! I can assure you that, in the UK, a soldier is a member of the army - the army only. Nobody here would call a member of the RN or the RAF a ‘soldier’ - it would be thought of as ridiculous. We would most likely use the term ‘Servicemen/women’ as a global descriptor for members of the armed forces.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion
Date: 13 May 20 - 11:11 AM

Mrrzy, look at it this way.

Cats and dogs and budgerigars and hamsters are all pets. No one says hamsters are cats because it's easier.

Jenovah's Witnesses and Amish and Mennonites and Doukhobors have an important thing in common: they believe that war is always wrong and refuse military service. No one uses the word "Quaker" to refer to them all collectively; we say "conscientious objector" or "pacifist".

So soldiers, sailors, aviators and marines are all ... what? Members of the armed forces. Military personnel (although sailors who studied Latin in school will wince at that). Service personnel. In French, des militaires.

If you know someone well enough to comment on her occupation, you know if she's a soldier or a sailor or a wrench-bender in the Air Force. If you don't, but still wish to comment, you say "She's in the forces, but I'm not sure what she does."

If it's the 11th of November and you're in Ottawa, and it's not raining too hard, you go to the Cenotaph for the ... military parade. The sailors are at the front, because the Navy takes the right of the line in a mixed contingent (NB: in British and Commonwealth forces).

But on the first Sunday in May, the people holding up traffic on Confederation Square are all in dark blue uniforms because it's Battle of the Atlantic Sunday. So it's a ... naval parade.

Journalists who don't know any better occasionally refer to a "military ship". Their editors, who do know better, promptly change that to "naval vessel" or "warship", depending on whether it's a destroyer or a diving tender.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 May 20 - 11:37 AM

I grew up overseas, mostly in African ex-French colonies, 60's and 70's. The English speakers did not distinguish among the various armed forces. We had Marines guarding the embassy (and partying, shooting pool, going to beaches), but they did not argue terminology when lumped in with other members of other armed forces if we used the term Soldier as a generic. Like I said, the first time I was corrected was in the aughties, in NC.

The French speakers also used "soldat" for any military person. Newspapers did not use "troop" to mean individual member of armed forces. That is newspeak, like the horribly oxymoronic, or just moronic, term Peacekeepers. Requiring a civilian (whether Quaker or other conscientious objector, or just ignorant -or uncaring- of details of uniforms) to know which branch some rando is in before referring to them is just plain silly.

Like I said, English (US, UK or whatever) needs a one-word, simple, generic term for "member of the armed forces" -so does French, and so do all languages whose speakers want to talk about those waging war. So if y'all don't want people to use the word Soldier, please propose something.

Next I'll be hearing that continuing to use Literally to mean Not Figuratively is incorrect. Sorry, but it's not, even though enough people use it to mean Figuratively that it's gotten into the dictionary. It may be common usage, but it is still wrong.

Now my use of Soldier may be common but still wrong, sure. What I ask is, what is right?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 May 20 - 11:49 AM

This from an old dictionary, online: look at def 1, first two clauses: A man engaged in military service, one whose occupation is military. Then yes in army, then back to just being anyone in the military.

SOLDIER, noun soljur. [from Latin solidus, a piece of money, the pay of a soldier ]

1. A man engaged in military service; one whose occupation is military; a man enlisted for service in an army; a private, or noe in the ranks. There ought to be some time for sober reflection between the life of a soldier and his death.

2. A man enrolled for service, when on duty or embodied for military discipline; a private; as a militia soldier

3. Emphatically, a brave warrior; a man of military experience and skill, or a man of distinguished valor. In this sense, an officer of any grade may be denominated a soldier

So, um, yeah. It really did not used to be limited to *army* military people. I am not making it up! It could, in usage, apparently exclude officers, but not, say, Marines.

If it is to become limited to army, what is the new generic? If nobody volunteered we could use Draftee, but that doesn't work right now.

I am *old* eh.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion
Date: 13 May 20 - 11:55 AM

In English, there is no collective generic noun *at present* to match the French "militaire". The American singular usage of "troop" is a good example of how some English speakers are still struggling to find one, and I imagine that a word will emerge to do the job sometime before I die.

Or maybe not. English is weird in many ways, and this is one.

(BTW, "soldat" is not generic in most of the Francosphere; it is the ground-pounding counterpart of "matelot". The accepted generic in French Canada is "militaire".)

In Canada, where the armed services have been a singular since 1968, the adjective "military" is approaching the status of collective noun for the services themselves, as in "the military is the biggest source of government spending", or, "he's in the military so he's never home". But we have no accepted generic noun for individual persons. "Serviceman" was the word in 1950, but that doesn't work any more with so many women in the ranks.

I don't like "in the military", but I'm an Olde Pharte and an editor at that. At least it's better than using "soldier" for everybody who wears the National Tweed.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 May 20 - 12:08 PM

Serviceman/Servicewoman?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion
Date: 13 May 20 - 12:14 PM

Since we're doing etymology, take a look at "military". It derives from miles, militis, a soldier.

Nautical or navy arise from nauta, nautae, a sailor.

Why did the word for a coin give us the word for "soldier"? Because back in the day, a soldier was a warrior who accepted his recompense (salary, from the soldier's ration of salt) from the state through his commander; all the other warriors got theirs in the form of loot.

In the British tradition, the personnel of the Navy remained ad hoc far longer than that of the Army -- well up into the 19th century, in fact -- hence the whole thing of the press gang. Soldiers did go to sea, but their status was so different that the language quickly acquired a special word for them: Marines. And they are not sailors, and never have been. (Just ask one.)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 13 May 20 - 12:19 PM

Miriam-Webster dictionary gives Serviceperson as a member of the armed forces.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: meself
Date: 13 May 20 - 12:40 PM

Most people in Canada, I believe, simply use "in the forces" (or "farces", depending on the mood); e.g., "he's in the forces, so they move around a lot". It would be rare to hear, "he's a soldier ...."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 May 20 - 12:56 PM

Serviceman/woman requires looking under, not just at, the uniform.

Matelot is sailor whether in the military or not, I thought...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 13 May 20 - 01:12 PM

Serviceperson doesn’t, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion
Date: 13 May 20 - 01:25 PM

Matelot is a sailor whether in the NAVY or not.

Like I said, way up thread, a sailor can be a civilian, as in a merchant mariner or a yachtsman.

Meself is correct. Canadians tend to recast the sentence, saying "he's in the forces". Or "farces", depending on their experience of life in The Mob.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 May 20 - 05:46 PM

Yeah, I don't like -person as a gender-neutral (and this from a non-binary human!) - I say Chair, not Chairperson, for instance. Chairperson just sounds made-up and lip-service-y. Serviceperson is ok as invented terms go, but we already *have* soldier as an organic, gender- and service-neutral term...
I gather it's not neutral to people *in* the services but I'm not, so I'm ok with that.

I'm a pain. I want to be referred to in the 3rd person as They, which isn't going over well either...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion
Date: 13 May 20 - 08:54 PM

Mrrzy, you’re paddling upstream on that one. English doesn’t go there yet.

If that’s the hill you’ve chosen to die on, you may have to move to a place where German or Spanish is spoken.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 May 20 - 09:06 PM

We have lady policemen in Cornwall.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Gurney
Date: 13 May 20 - 09:16 PM

Isn't this good!   The English language, in terms of number of accepted words, is by far the largest in the world. There are more words therein than there are in the next TWO largest languages, French and German.

And here we are, lumbered with a population hell-bent on adding to it!

Such a shame that these lumberers aren't lexicographers reviving currently semi-forgotten words. In my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 14 May 20 - 01:21 PM

German has neuter but then doesn't use it for neuter things. Table is masculine. Sun is feminine. Maiden is neuter. Sigh.

Spanish and French have masculine and feminine but no neuter. I use both in written French, e.g. je suis content(e). Spoken is more difficult... I tend to pause after Content, then pronounce the T.

In Spanish the noun Mar (sea) is masculine unless you are a sailor, when it becomes feminine.
In French, the noun Amour (love) is masculine in the singular and feminine in the plural. Now *that* tells you something!

The funniest was someone appropriately using They (referring to me) at which point I almost said No, that was me. Learning curves all around.

I wonder what people thought while You, originally plural (thee was the singular), was shifting to mean the singular as well...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: meself
Date: 14 May 20 - 01:57 PM

GB Shaw, said (as you are all aware): "In German, a turnip has sex but a woman does not."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Joe_F
Date: 14 May 20 - 06:37 PM

Mrrzy: In Bible English, the singular forms were thou, thee, thy, thine, and the plural forms were ye, you, your, yours. However (as in many European languages), it was considered polite to use the plural form in addressing a superior. That worked its way down to addressing equals, and by Shakespeare's time it was getting to be an insult to "thou" someone (other than God).

In other languages the process has not gone so far; it is a sign of intimacy to use the "thou" forms. In German, there is actually a ceremony for that: you drink a toast while linking elbows, and thereafter you are buddies or sweethearts and call each other du instead of sie. When I studied Russian we learned an amusing list of persons whom one still called "ty" instead of "vy": family, close friends, children, animals, God, and the Tsar.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 May 20 - 01:10 AM

Fascinating , i must remember that ,next time i talk to the Tsar

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 15 May 20 - 05:00 AM

The English singular form can still be heard in the Yorkshire dialect.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: G-Force
Date: 15 May 20 - 05:45 AM

Indeed. I can still remember my university digs landlord in Sheffield saying " A tha goin' to't match?" (Definitely the Blades, not the Owls).

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 May 20 - 07:35 AM

Quakers like my grandpa said Thee to family and other Quakers.
I still wonder what people thought as You took over from Thee. Whippersnappers being cold and distant, probably.
Hungarian has 4 grammatical levels of politeness: regular conjugation 2nd person singular (like Tu) for peers, children, animals, gods; a self-type of conjugation (like And how is himself today?) for showing respect to social inferiors like street sweepers; regular 3nd person conjugation for kids-to-adults or work colleagues etc, and a "pleases" 3rd person like Does it please to come this way) for old folks. I have gotten into trouble with these.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Joe MacGillivray
Date: 15 May 20 - 10:34 AM

In regards to some of these recent posts: Soldier; in Gaelic, Soldier is saighdear which would come from archer.

Thu is singular and sibh is plural for you and youse respectfully. It also applies to age, how well you know the person or an authority figure. To keep it basic, I made it on singular and plural. The concept in Nova Scotia remains with some using youse as the plural.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 May 20 - 11:08 AM

I like the Southetn (US) y'all, for general plural, and All y'all for more inclusive plural.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 May 20 - 04:43 PM

my wife and me went for a walk, and i didnt say nothing

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 May 20 - 06:29 PM

"my wife and me went for a walk, and i didnt say nothing"

Get a grip, Dick. You mean:

my wife and me, like, went for a walk, and i didnt say nothing, innit"

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Joe_F
Date: 16 May 20 - 06:42 PM

A wise man once said nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 17 May 20 - 05:10 AM

Let me make it absolutely clear. The Government's policy is that both my wife and I should be able to take exercise whenever and wherever we choose and that our chosen form of exercise is walking. Current scientific evidence suggests that face masks could provide a barrier to communication but wearing one, together with social distancing, gives me increased confidence that my wife has received all the useful information I have to give at this time.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 17 May 20 - 06:52 AM

Let me say this about that...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 May 20 - 08:42 AM

I have to say...


(Not if you don't want, you don't have to!)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: weerover
Date: 17 May 20 - 09:12 AM

Watching a documentary about emergency services this morning, The commentator said one crash victim had damaged vertebrae "in her back" (actually it sounded like he said "vertebra" as the plural, but can't be sure).

I have a number of everyday ones that bug me inordinately, such as "I thought to myself": don't know who else you could think to.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 17 May 20 - 09:16 AM

I thought to myself

.. as against thinking out loud.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 17 May 20 - 09:27 AM

Thinking IS to oneself, yeah! That's why you have to say Out Loud when talking and not just thinking.
Thinking out loud is oxymoronic. Thinking to oneself is redundant.
I love this thread. I hadn't noticed either of those before.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 May 20 - 10:41 AM

Pleonasms can be quite entertaining. Our local BBC weatherman speaks of "dawn tomorrow morning" just about every day. Not quite as funny as DCI Grimm in the Thin Blue Line with his "8 AM in the morning hundred hours." "Tuna fish" is another belter. "ATM machine." HIV virus." A good Cloughie one: "In actual fact...". My much reviled "On a daily basis." Though I suppose Shakespeare might have done it on purpose in Julius Caesar when he had Mark Antony, standing over Caesar's bloodied body, saying that it was "the most unkindest cut of all."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 May 20 - 10:43 AM

"PIN number."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 May 20 - 12:01 PM

Rushing to catch the train, my umbrella fell out of my pocket.

Throwing the bread into the pond, the ducks ate it all up.

After spending decades in the attic, I uncovered my childhood school exercise books.

I chased the cat in my pyjamas out of the garden.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 17 May 20 - 01:39 PM

Love dangling participles.

I fell in love with a weather forecaster when they read the teleprompter which said Ground Fog, stopped, turned to the camera and said Well of course it's *ground*! If it weren't on the ground it'd be up in the air and be *clouds*!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 17 May 20 - 07:02 PM

Which is it, You and *what* army or Tou and *whose* army? They are differently disdainful to me. I would think England v. US but I've heard both from both.
Shrek comes to mind, American movie but nonAmerican English-speaking ogre.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 May 20 - 07:42 PM

If anyone has translator notes for that last post, please forward....

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion
Date: 18 May 20 - 11:25 AM

In my part of the world, Mrrzy, it's "you and whose army?"

Shrek is voiced by an English-born Canadian actor, Mike Myers, whose family emigrated from Liverpool to Scarborough, a suburb of Toronto, when he was a child.

George MacDonald Fraser quotes "you and whose army" in one of his short stories about life in a post-war Scottish infantry regiment, collected in one volume as The Complete MacAuslan. If I recall correctly, Shrek has a Scottish accent, and Myers (or the scriptwriter) may have added the insult because it is a typical bit of Glaswegian repartee.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Charmion's brother Andrew
Date: 18 May 20 - 12:39 PM

Mike Myers was born in Scarberia, not Liverpool. ("Scarberia" is the nickname given to the dreary suburb of Toronto that is known for too much asphalt and too few trees.) His reputation for being "difficult to work with" comes in part from the making of "Shrek." He recorded the voice in his Canadian accent, was not happy with the result and asked to re-record it. The second go at it he did with his "Scots" accent.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 18 May 20 - 12:53 PM

Shrek said "...and what army?" but Dick Francis wrote "...and whose army?" so given the clarification (of my definitely unclear post, speaking of peeves) I think What may be North American and Whose from (geographically if not politically) Europe.

Imma switch to Whose. It means to me that even *with* an army *you* couldn't do it. I love the added layer of sneer.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 18 May 20 - 12:53 PM

..... because it is a typical bit of Glaswegian repartee.

I agree that it is "You and whose army" but it is not limited to Glasgow. It was a common bit bravado when I was growing up in Liverpool. If the actor's family came from Liverpool, maybe that's where he picked it up.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 18 May 20 - 01:12 PM

Ok different peeve: when someone is killed BY something, say so, newspaper folk. Headlines saying Woman killed after being run over makes it sound like she survived being run over only to be shot or something afterwards.