BS: Language Pet Peeves

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 12:44 PM

And I'm amused by the fact that we're competing as to who enjoys the greater wokitudinousness...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 01:27 PM

No Steve, I'm not competing with you. I am not claiming to be more woke than you - just that you are not more woke than me as your choice of referring to a spouse is no better than others available. Your objection to the term "my wife" as implying inequality, condescension or property-owning is, frankly, nonsense.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 02:57 PM

I didn't say that "my wife" is "implying inequality, condescension or property-owning!" I said that (in line with the history of the associations with those things of the use of "wife"), the term "my wife," as used in print, has a hint (the word I used, not "implications") of those associations. It will always be undeliberate on the part of the writer, but, to me, it has that ring about it so I don't type it. To imply, Doug, is to make a deliberate point without putting it into precise words, which is completely different from what I was saying. "My husband" doesn't carry those historical associations because, as far as I'm aware, there haven't been cultures in which women "owned" men along with their goods and chattels. But if I see or hear "hubby" it takes me at least five minutes to unclench my buttocks.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 05:38 PM

Let's just agree to disagree.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 05:58 PM

Cloughie: "If I had an argument with a player, we'd sit down and talk about it for 20 minutes then decide that I was right." I liked Cloughie...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 06:04 PM

I hate asterisks in swear words. Is it f***, f**k, f#@§ - or fuck?

I know what I think when I see asterisks in that word. I think it's f*uck!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: HuwG
Date: 19 Sep 23 - 07:50 PM

"My wife" as opposed to "the wife"; does the usage of "the wife" imply that one is treating the seventh commandment lightly?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: BobL
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 03:51 AM

How about "other half", whether "my" or "the"?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 04:00 AM

does the usage of "the wife" imply that one is treating the seventh commandment lightly?

In what way?

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 04:11 AM

"My car" as opposed to "the car"; "I'll be coming in the car".

"The car" doesn't imply taking without consent.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 04:32 AM

So you're now including your wife with your goods 'n' chattels, Doug! What did I tell you!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 04:35 AM

It should be "the other half," as "my other half" implies that your body comes in two equal and separable pieces...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 04:37 AM

I thought we had drawn a line under it, Steve.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Geoff Wallis
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 06:36 AM

'I liked Cloughie... '

That'll be Mr. Clough to you, young man.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 09:35 AM

"I'm not saying that I'm the greatest manager, but I'm in the top one."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 10:21 AM

"My better half" is the U.S. form and is usually complimentary.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 10:36 AM

Yeah, that's not bad!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Stanron
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 12:13 PM

From UK TV;

'er indoors
She who must be obeyed
The Management

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: meself
Date: 20 Sep 23 - 12:20 PM

How about "the ball and chain"? Or should it be "MY ball and chain"? Or, "she who must be obeyed"?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Senoufou
Date: 21 Sep 23 - 02:55 AM

My husband has coined a new expression for this : "Madame Yapp-Yapp"!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Thompson
Date: 22 Sep 23 - 02:42 AM

In Ireland it's common enough for husbands to refer to wives, and wives to husbands, as "the boss" - eg, "What, you want me to keep that stray puppy? I'll have to check with the boss."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 22 Sep 23 - 08:40 AM

Meself... I loved Rumpole!

My radio station has started saying Area has (temp) instead of It is (temp) in Area.

No, Charlottesville does not have 25 degrees.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Lighter
Date: 22 Sep 23 - 03:06 PM

The original "She-who-must-be-obeyed" (thus punctuated) was the Queen Ayesha in H. Rider Haggard's "She: A History of Adventure" (1887).

The 1965 movie starred Ursula Andress as "She."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet PeevesI
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Sep 23 - 02:16 PM

I wondered where Rumpole got it.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Sep 23 - 04:39 PM

Anyone who says "small little"
Why not "teensy tiny miniscule small little"?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Sep 23 - 04:50 PM

It's minUscule, Bill... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Sep 23 - 06:07 PM

Um.. a "teensy tiny minuscule small little" mistake."

Now, should I add commas? ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Sep 23 - 07:31 PM

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 25 Sep 23 - 01:22 AM

“A tad bit”. Aaaarrgghh!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Sep 23 - 04:06 PM

Innocent. In conflicts we hear that innocent civilians are bombed. Today, we heard that an "innocent" 15-year-old girl was murdered by stabbing on her way to school. Why innocent? Are we saying that you especially don't deserve to die if you're "innocent" in unspecified ways? Where I come from, even the most evil bastards are regarded as undeserving of death, seeing that we did away with the death penalty decades ago. So don't say "innocent." It's a brainless and emotional addendum to descriptions of victims of horrors. Civilians were bombed. A 15-year-old girl was murdered on her way to school. Two powerful statements that don't require further characterisation of the victims.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 11:47 AM

Oh, yeah, that use of Innocent bugs me too.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 12:16 PM

I'm struggling here with that affectionate term used for girls/young ladies, "lass" or "lassie," the latter usually applied to younger girls. It's what plural to use. If you see a bunch of nine-year-old girls, especially in Scotland, you might say "Look at those lassies!" Logical, or does it sound like you're referring to a pack of collies? I saw that plural used in the Guardian this morning and it faintly rankled. But a bunch of mature young women might be "lasses," eh? Do we really need two separate plural spellings for a word that sounds identical? Every time I see "lassies" something visceral has me thinking that an ignorant mistake has been made...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: meself
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 01:31 PM

Just heard this one in a radio discussion of some TV show (why are you promoting your competition?): "He's a widow". This was repeated a few times, with no one correcting the guy who kept saying it. Is "He's a widow" a 'thing' now??

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 03:05 PM

He wasn't talking about a male spider, was he? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Lighter
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 03:07 PM

Masculine "widows" *are* a thing now.

Have heard this several times over the last few years.

It's like replacing "actress" with "actor." It supposedly helps in degenderfying life.

If that's your bag.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 03:14 PM

The Guardian style guide on actor/actress:

actor
Use for both male and female actors; do not use actress except when in the name of an award, eg Oscar for best actress. The Guardian’s view is that actress comes into the same category as authoress, comedienne, manageress, “lady doctor”, “male nurse” and similar obsolete terms that date from a time when professions were largely the preserve of one sex (usually men). As Whoopi Goldberg put it in an interview with the paper: “An actress can only play a woman. I’m an actor – I can play anything.”

There is normally no need to differentiate between the sexes – and if there is, the words male and female are perfectly adequate: Lady Gaga won a Brit in 2010 for best international female artist, not artiste, chanteuse, or songstress.

As always, use common sense: a piece about the late film director Carlo Ponti was edited to say that in his early career he was “already a man with a good eye for pretty actors ...” As the readers’ editor pointed out in the subsequent clarification: “This was one of those occasions when the word ‘actresses’ might have been used”

Let common sense prevail!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 04:34 PM

Da Vinci. This is just nonsense. Leonardo's name was Leonardo. "Da Vinci" means "of the village Vinci," which thousands of denizens of that village could have used. Leonardo da Vinci is fine. But referring to him as though "da Vinci" is his surname, without Leonardo, is just pig ignorant. I saw this in the Guardian today, and, of course, there's "Da Vinci Code." It's just laughable.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 06:31 PM

Leonardo's name was Leonardo. "Da Vinci" means "of the village Vinci," which thousands of denizens of that village could have used.

If I read a report where the name Leonardo is used on its own, it could be Leonardo Da Vinci, Leonardo DiCaprio or one of a host of other well known Leonardos. If the report uses Da Vinci on its own, I would immediately think of Leonardo Da Vinci. I would not imagine it would be Giuseppe Da Vinci, Leonardo's neighbour from next door but one, nor Giovanni Da Vinci who opened a pizzeria in the town long after Leonardo died.

If "Da Vinci" is used on its own, do you understand what is meant? In reality, is there any possible ambiguity? If the answers are "Yes" and "No", then it meets all the requirements for good communication.

To take a couple of quotes from upthread: The evolution of meanings of words is time-honoured and is healthy; Language is wot people speak, not wot professors of language profess.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 06:48 PM

Well, Doug, feel free to call me Stephen da Radcliffe. The bald fact is that "da Vinci" without Leonardo is simply not his name, end of. He was an illegitimate child and, if you look him up, you'll find that he could have adopted another name to follow "Leonardo."

"If I read a report where the name Leonardo is used on its own, it could be Leonardo Da Vinci, Leonardo DiCaprio or one of a host of other well known Leonardos..."

Disingenuous nonsense, Doug. If you read a report where Leonardo is used on its own, and that report means to refer to Leonardo da Vinci, there will one hundred percent be a ton of context, art, sculpture, whatever, that will confirm to you that the reference is to the great artist and no-one else. No-one is going to mention Leonardo in isolation if they mean Leonardo diCaprio, yer daft bugger. The bottom line here is that his surname is not "da Vinci," any more than your name is Doug da Ashton-under-Lyme or wherever it is you come from.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 07:19 PM

... any more than your name is Doug da Ashton-under-Lyme or wherever it is you come from.

The surname Chadwick comes from the "village of Ceadda (or Chad)" and originates in the parish of Rochdale, Lancashire (now Greater Manchester). The name has spread over the centuries but is still well represented in the North West of England. I think the parallels with "Da Vinci" are quite strong.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 23 - 07:42 PM

Well Shaw means "copse" or "thicket" (shut up, Doug), and is related to Littlewood. I had a fiancée who lived in Shaw (coincidentally) and we nearly got married until she thought better of it. I used to visit her by riding my moped from Radcliffe, down Bury Old Road then down Sheepfoot Lane by Heaton Park. Eventually I graduated to my dad's Vauxhall Viva and got there via the M62 from Besses to the A627(M) turnoff. Ah, those were the days. But I digress. Back to the cheery fray, Doug!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: G-Force
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 03:54 AM

It's a bit like Santa Claus. It drives me mad when people call him Santa as if that were his name. His name is Claus, (short for Nicholas), ferchrisake. Santa means Saint.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 06:55 AM

I suppose that if you just say "Claus" you might get the odd double-take as people think you're talking about something on a cat. "Santa" on its own nearly always means Father Christmas and has the convenience of not causing confusion. In Italy there are hundreds of churches called Santa-something, and there's Santa Lucia of course (which I once sang in a duet with a boatman just off Siracusa in Sicily), but the default understanding, in an appropriate context, of "Santa" is that you're talking about the Christmas chap.

Leonardo added "da Vinci" to his name himself in order to distinguish himself from other local Leonardos. In almost every case if you're talking about "Leonardo" (and, as I keep saying, context is everything), there's no need to add "da Vinci," though you can if you like. "Leonardo da Vinci" is unobjectionable, but referring to a chap called "da Vinci" without the Leonardo is just ignorant and wrong. Incidentally, Doug, it's only "Da Vinci" if you're starting a sentence with it, otherwise it's "da Vinci," never "Da Vinci," and fusing the two bits into a single word is just laughable.

Everybody knows who you mean if you say Michelangelo, and if you use his surname at all (it's Buonarroti plus a few other bits if you're a purist), you're just showing off. In other cases of less-eminent people, you might have to add a helpful bit on to the end on its first use, e.g. "Geoffrey of Monmouth." You wouldn't then go on to calling him just "of Monmouth," would you?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 07:10 AM

"via the M62 from Besses to the A627(M) turnoff"

Before some present-day local puts me right, it was the turnoff AFTER the A627M, for Shaw, A640. Don't like leaving chinks!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 07:43 AM

Artiste is not the feminine form of artist.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 09:25 AM

Nice one, Manitas!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 10:20 AM

Did anyone make that blunder here?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 10:28 AM

It was in the quote from the Guardian, talking about Lady Gaga.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 10:38 AM

”Lady Gaga won a Brit in 2010 for best international female artist, not artiste, chanteuse, or songstress.”

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 11:22 AM

The three of you need to read that Guardian quote again! In no way does it imply that artiste is the feminine form of artist. In fact, it specifically says not to use the word artiste in that way, so no blunder as far as I can see. I have to assume that you're all fans of the Daily Telegraph! ;-)