mudcat.org: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3]


BS: Victoriaaaaaar

Jack Blandiver 30 Nov 09 - 11:07 AM
Jack Campin 30 Nov 09 - 02:10 PM
MGM·Lion 30 Nov 09 - 03:46 PM
Gervase 30 Nov 09 - 04:47 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 30 Nov 09 - 06:43 PM
MGM·Lion 30 Nov 09 - 09:26 PM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 02:36 AM
VirginiaTam 01 Dec 09 - 03:33 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Dec 09 - 04:54 AM
GUEST,Pete Doc fan 01 Dec 09 - 05:20 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Dec 09 - 05:24 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Dec 09 - 06:18 AM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 07:25 AM
Bryn Pugh 01 Dec 09 - 08:55 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Dec 09 - 09:15 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Dec 09 - 09:18 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Dec 09 - 09:38 AM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 10:06 AM
Bryn Pugh 01 Dec 09 - 10:09 AM
Smedley 01 Dec 09 - 10:34 AM
GUEST,Neovo 01 Dec 09 - 10:44 AM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 11:13 AM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 11:25 AM
Jack Blandiver 01 Dec 09 - 11:26 AM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 12:44 PM
Ruth Archer 01 Dec 09 - 12:58 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 01 Dec 09 - 01:51 PM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 02:49 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Dec 09 - 03:14 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 01 Dec 09 - 03:26 PM
Gervase 01 Dec 09 - 03:59 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Dec 09 - 05:18 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 01 Dec 09 - 05:41 PM
Smedley 01 Dec 09 - 05:45 PM
Bonzo3legs 02 Dec 09 - 06:18 AM
Jack Blandiver 02 Dec 09 - 06:33 AM
Acorn4 02 Dec 09 - 07:59 AM
Smedley 02 Dec 09 - 08:07 AM
HuwG 02 Dec 09 - 10:02 AM
Acorn4 02 Dec 09 - 11:28 AM
Acorn4 02 Dec 09 - 01:26 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Dec 09 - 02:12 PM
Acorn4 03 Dec 09 - 04:07 AM
Bonzo3legs 04 Dec 09 - 11:51 AM
Bonzo3legs 04 Dec 09 - 01:43 PM
Jack Blandiver 05 Dec 09 - 03:57 AM
Bonzo3legs 05 Dec 09 - 07:53 AM
Gervase 05 Dec 09 - 09:11 AM
Bonzo3legs 06 Dec 09 - 08:22 AM
MGM·Lion 06 Dec 09 - 09:03 AM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 11:07 AM

I couldn't give a toss about their ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, hair colour or whatever, but I would like them to be able to speak properly.

With speech, there is no proper - only an irksome prejudice that elects to somehow superior in order to justify the sort of discrimination as celebrated above. So that's the disabled, the spastics, the hare-lipped, the deaf, the stoke victims, the stammerers (&c.) out the window then. Nice one, Gervase!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Campin
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 02:10 PM

A lot of people (perhaps the majority of the British population) perceive RP accents as aggressively patronizing. Which does not necessarily mean people with the disability of having such an accent shouldn't be employed in customer-facing positions, but they may need remedial training in how not to offend the public.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 03:46 PM

As Shaw remarked in the Preface to 'Pygmalion', "No Englishman can open his mouth without making some other Englishman despise him" - used as a line in the song "Why can't the English?" in the 'My Fair Lady' musical adaptation.

A pity, of course; but all the agonising on this thread is, alas, nothing new.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 04:47 PM

Nice one, Gervase!
No problem, Sweeney.
O that we could all be such paragons. I read your postings and somehow feel inadequate; my life has been but a pale shadow of yours when it comes to morality, beneficence and decency. My dear Divis, I just wish I had the generosity of spirit properly to learn from your example here on the Mudcat when it comes to how to treat my fellow human beings. Please let me know when the beatification is due and I'll be sure to light a penny candle to you.

Meanwhile, while I exist in a state of disgrace and you continue to labour on this mortal coil for the benefit of others, I shall continue to exercise my irksome prejudice and suggest that you take your sanctimonious, priggish, whey-faced and mealy-mouthed attitude and shove it arsewards.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 06:43 PM

A comment from a 'colonial'.
Brian Sewell- good upper class English, easy on the ears (heard one of his travel muses on BBCAmerica), but after a while, to use a word once used by teens here, BOOOORrring!

ControVer'sy- said by Americans and most western Canadians; conTro'versy usual on BBCAmerica (heard in US and Canada on the cable). This stress shift heard on a number of words. Not objectionable; supported by the OED.

AmericaR, Alabamar, Victoriar; the R after vowel ending used by Irish in Boston and surrounds, immediately distinguishes them from the old upper class (brahmins) "like the Cabots and Lodges." Also heard from sone English here (from Sheffield- a regional variation?).

Most of the newscasters and moderators on BBC America are excellent, their English clear and clean, only the occasional slight accent (Lise Doucet, Julia Dunlop, etc.) which adds a bit of flavor.
The Weathercasters, however, are much lower on the scale- English average? Without the screen images, some would be not understandable.

The Army are or Chelsea are, rather than IS, grates on American ears, but not objectionable. I think the OED supports this usage.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 09:26 PM

Many usages, as implied in Q's post above, are optional & supported as such by good dictionaries - e.g. for 'controversy', both pronunciations rubricated above will be given as options.

For those interested in this aspect of linguistic usage, Longman's Pronunciation Dictionary by J C Wells is recommended - it goes in detail into the percentage [found by survey &c] of language users who use a particular pronunciation: e.g. in the instance under review, it shows that a 1988 British survey showed 58/42 in favour of 'trov' against 'kontr', but this had changed to 60/40 10 years later; adding that 'In US "kontr" the only possibility'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:36 AM

The Army are or Chelsea are, rather than IS, grates on American ears, but not objectionable. I think the OED supports this usage.
The use of the plural for collective nouns is an unfortunate journalistic convention that used to be confined solely to the sports pages. There it used to be commonplace, perhaps tolerated because of the absurd sense of superiority that existed among the news and comment writers, who looked down their noses at the ignorant 'sweaties' filling the back pages with unimportant stuff for the lower orders.
Unfortunately standards in journalism have fallen greatly in recent years, and now you'll find the pluralisation of collectives everywhere. It grates on English ears too!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:33 AM

hhmmm lazy language

I have to say that during my late teens through late 20's my once carefully attended pronunciations and grammar were supplanted by "mother speak" which was part dumbing down in order to be best understood by my children when they were very little and part attempt at the most efficacious and least energy eating way of getting things done. Maybe it was laziness. Maybe it was exhaustion.

In my early 30's I enjoyed (and I do not use the word lightly) a revival of proper speaking and disdain for the strong central Virginia accent and use of idioms I had attained. This probably due to attending university and wishing to feel I belonged. I was moving and conversing in different circles than I had as a stay at home mom. It was not easy, to say the least. In fact, it wasn't easy when I was younger. I was simply so determined after having been hearing and language impaired the first 8 years of my life to make something better of how I expressed myself.

In any case this mid life renaissance was not to last. Upon moving to the UK at 45 I have experienced a devolution of language and a return (with vengeance) to my Central Virginia accent and ludicrous idioms which have no place in my current society.

Why is this? Why these phases? I think my current state is two fold. I find I miss the sound of American (especially south eastern) accents terribly open living in UK. So perhaps in part it is homesickness which prompted the return to former lingual habits. But I also feel too tired and cannot bring to mind what I want to say as well as how it should be said. Age and illness are taking their toll on my thought processes and capacity for language.

So I think, some people probably all will go through stages of language throughout their lives relative to their society an experiences.

On another note

I still don't understand where the practice to pronounce the letter "H" as "haitch" as well as the practice to pronounce the "h" when it should be silent and not pronounce it when it shouldn't be silent. Where did that come from? I noticed that even school teachers do this including one young fellow who applied for a graduate degree programme at an Essex High school. I believe he was selected.   Is it actually taught in schools or does it come from familial and social learning?

And another one for the US. "Ax" instead of "ask" is one that has grown in prevalence over the last couple of decades. In my experience only heard from a very small number of the African Americans I knew in school in the 1970's. Most I knew did not use this pronunciation. So it was not the norm among the Blacks I met through my young and mid adult hood. However, it has become trendy to pronounce the word inappropriately among an age group rather than ethnic group. I hear more and more (alarmingly) in the UK now. Spread (I believe) by Rap music. That's culture for ya!

Whoa! That is enough thinking for today. Smoke's acomin' outta my ears.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 04:54 AM

Most of what I argue for / against on Mudcat is generally against the sanctimonious, priggish, whey-faced and mealy-mouthed attitude[s] one encounters herein - such as Gervase's campaign for proper speech, which is fundamentally discriminatory against the right of any individual to speak the way they do without being measured against some culturally-deadening yardstick thus found wanting by standards completely alien to their own. All I'm saying is to live and let live - and maybe enjoy the differences as culture evolves as culture will. No need to be so insulting, Gervase.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: GUEST,Pete Doc fan
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:20 AM

Well said Suibhne. It is discrimination against my generation. Younger people today speak and text in "Their Lingo". My generation is going to change a lot of this stuffy old stiff upper lip crap. People like Gervase should find one of the "Classics" from three hundred years ago and go read it all alone in some dusty room. What is his point anyway ? is he one of these "Pure British in body,mind and soul ? And by pen and word of course !

It's the 21st century out there guys, not the middle ages. We write,speak,text and think for ourselves.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:24 AM

Singular or plural verb for collective noun is another option — &, despite what is said above, always has been, at least since before the publication of the original Fowler. Specialist writing like sports pages &c has nothing to do with the matter.

I still urge the anything-goes-so-long-as-you're-happy brigade, led on here by Sweeney, to beware of too much obeisance to relativism, which can be as great a menace as the pedantic over-prescriptiveness it is supposed to conflict with - represented here, so Sweeney alleges, by Gervase; who however seems to me to express himself with tolerable moderation.

Those who know me know that I am not a keep-the-peace-at-all-costs compromiser: but this is one instance where the truth seems to me genuinelty to lie between the extremes. Knowing which mode of discourse is appropriate to which situation is the skill all should endeavour to master.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 06:18 AM

My point is that culture is what people do; you can't police that, or moderate it, or yet punish it. At best we might observe it and celebrate it; for language will run wild free as it must. The inner laws of language are not governed by the laws of Grammatical Correctness, rather the innate pragmatism by which language will out as an absolute necessity of our individual & collective humanity. Thus it can never be wrong - only in the eyes of the more reactive elements such as found on this thread.

Oh - and here's The Legendary Muscat Cold Of / Could Have Debate from June 1998. I'm particularly proud of this:

We are born understanding the grammar, the grammar is hard-wired into the human brain ready to deal with the cultural software of language, which we receive in any number of ways, and in any number of vernacular variables any one of which might be said to be grammatically correct as long as people understand one another. Abide by your fairy-tale notions of Absolute Grammatical Correctness all you want, but appreciate that such linguistic diversity a) exists, b) is a very good & desirable thing and c) impossible to govern by a set of rules. Language is a cleansing wildfire, it is where the subjectivity of individual cognition & the objectivity of collective culture intertwine, sparking off the empirical excellence of being alive in the first place. Language a two-way interface that determines the vitality of all cultural change & exchange & the most sweetly eloquent of colloquial intercourse - and in the vernacular, language is at its wildest and most dynamic.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 07:25 AM

We are born understanding the grammar....in the vernacular, language is at its wildest and most dynamic.
In the vernacular, wishful bollocks!
Yes, linguistic diversity exists, but most languages have two forms; the formal and the vernacular. Welsh is a prime example, with written, bardic Welsh being very different from spoken Welsh.
In normal social intercourse the vernacular is fine and is capable of wonderful colour and clarity. There are areas, however, where 'grammatical correctness' is important. If you wish to communicate with someone outside your argot, then Standard English is the best medium. If you wish to convey subtlety, shade and nuance to an unseen audience, then Standard English is the best medium. If you wish to state something without fear of misunderstanding or equivocation (as in a court of law or in business) then Standard English is the best medium.
And, with some people, even outside formal intercourse the vernacular is deficient. I have encountered too many young people for whom inarticulacy has become a curse. They can express themselves to their peers, but they struggle to make themselves understood to anyone else. An inadequate vocabulary and a tenuous grasp of syntax stands in the way of communication and leads to frustration, anger and aggression. To airily claim that grammar is 'hard wired' into their brains is a facile, middle-class condescension.
So I will stick to my prejudice. I have neither the time nor the patience to teach the rudiments of Standard English to someone in my employ, and many younger people would regard any attempt on my part as insulting and patronising. Accordingly, I prefer to offer work to people with whom I can communicate easily and comfortably and who, I feel, can deal any client, from a duke to a dustman, with confidence and clarity. The ability to make good tea, tolerate Radio 3 and 4 and appreciate terrible puns would be nice, too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:55 AM

Fedrwch chi'n siarad Cymraeg, Gervase ?

Peth yw y gair Cymraeg o "bollocks" ?

Yr ydych ch'n siarad, ac yn ysgrifennyd, baw mawr.

To quote Brendan Behan : it is the wonder of god that any sane person woud go within the bawl of an ass of you

Yr wyf f'in gyfreithwr, eto.

Your call, I think.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 09:15 AM

To airily claim that grammar is 'hard wired' into their brains is a facile, middle-class condescension.

No - it's biological fact. And I'm not middle-class.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 09:18 AM

I'm a bit dubious about the concept of 'biological fact' in this instance, Suibhne: 'hard-wired' strikes me as too metaphorical a phrase to represent any sort of scientific fact - would you not agree?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 09:38 AM

Humans are born with a biological capacity for language & culture; without it we don't develop - how can we? Without it, we're not human. We're collective beings & language evolves out of cognitive / cultural necessity - it is the software interface between the two. There exists a theory that over the last 50,000 years our mouths have evolved to favour language above dental health - thus do we suffer dental problems other higher primates don't. Hard-wired is a concept, a model, as most words & phrases are, but it serves to underline the absolute necessity of language a the signifier of our humanity. This is the way language works and gives narrative & metaphorical structure to our general concept of the world around us - even of ourselves. Consensus is all, and language can only ever evolve with respect of the collective, the culture of which is always evolving in and off itself, regardless of whatever absolutes & shibboleths we might set up along the way. These will pass away, as all things must in due course.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:06 AM

Ceilliau, Bryn?
I'm still a learner, but even I can see there are clear differences between Cymraeg llafar and Cymraeg llenyddol. And yes, in every day use you write as you speak, but even then I'd expect to hear shwmai but read sut mae or even sut rydych chi.
And being a lawyer isn't really relevant as - unfurtunately - the language of the law in Wales is still English. I know that there is a right to use Welsh in proceedings, but I know of no court that doesn't conduct all its affairs in English.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:09 AM

Nid yr ydych chi ddim yn darllen "baw mawr" ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Smedley
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:34 AM

Sorry if this has already been said, but 'should of' is surely a mistake derived from pronouncing the contraction 'should've' as if it was two separate words.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: GUEST,Neovo
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:44 AM

Smedley, you're probably right but people write it down in letters they send to me - and these "people" are university students.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 11:13 AM

You might think it's a pile of crap, but at least you can understand what I'm saying. That's the thing about Standard English - it helps to avoid misunderstanding.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 11:25 AM

Consensus is all, and language can only ever evolve with respect of the collective, the culture of which is always evolving in and off itself, regardless of whatever absolutes & shibboleths we might set up along the way. These will pass away, as all things must in due course.
Very true, but you're not going to get a consensus when it comes to solecisms like 'should of', 'aks', 'pacifically'. We may be a social animal, but our societies are stratified. The demotic may spread (witness the Queen's English shifting from strict RP to estuarine since her accession) but it is hard to shift the basic building blocks which ar laid down and passed on by the 'ruling classes' for want of a better phrase.
So pronunciation changes are common - apart from Her Maj, there's the adoption of the rising terminal by British youngsters; whether from Aussie soaps or not I don't know - but changes in syntax and grammar are less common/
Writing and, more importantly, printing, have served to set 50,000 years of mutable, orally-transmitted language into a more rigid form. We are taught to write a certain way and, however laissez-faire the education system, that way is Standard English. Thus SE becomes the lingua franca, and those who don't speak and, more importantly, write SE, appear ignorant.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 11:26 AM

and these "people" are university students.

Time, I think, to exit this particular pedantic hell.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 12:44 PM

Don't let the door hit your arse on the way out.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 12:58 PM

Gervase has summed it up very well in his penultimate post, I think.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 01:51 PM

What is "Standard English"?
There are no rules.
English does not have a governance body such as the Spanish Real Academia Española or the French equivalent.
We are "taught." The teaching, however varies.

Is The Oxford English Dictionary followed in "Standard English"?

Certainly most people, even university educated, vary in usage. People who trumpet "Standard English" never make clear what they have in mind.

Grammar, perhaps, is the only common denominator, although there are a few variants here as well.

Words are not standardized. Most people in the UK write recognise rather than the OED recognize, vary in the use of napkin, use plural verbs with collectives, etc.
Pants in US and Canada means trousers; to most in the UK this means an undergarment. Vest, knickers and other words for personal attire have different meanings in the English-speaking sphere.

The dominant culture, American, has its own "lingua franca" and Australia, New Zealand, Canada, England, Scotland etc., have their own.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:49 PM

Fowler pretty much sums up Standard English.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:14 PM

And makes extremely interesting reading too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:26 PM

Fowler not much used in the dominant culture, the United States.
Fowler used in UK, Canada, don't know about Australia.

The Chicago Manual of Style is used for most non-journalistic writing in the United States. The most used style guide for the general public is Strunk and White, The Elements of Style.

Newspapers follow the Associated Press Stylebook.

Guides have been developed for specific fields of endeavor; these include grammar and language usage as well, e. g. Grant, Geoscience Reporting Guidelines.

Quoting from Wikipedia on style guides, "Fowler's Modern English Usage" ...report how language is practiced in a given area....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:59 PM

Newspapers follow the Associated Press Stylebook.
Not in Europe they don't!
The thread has been concerned with shibboleths in English rather than American English, so Strunk & White, although excellent, isn't relevant.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:18 PM

"the dominant culture"

Is that really the right word?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:41 PM

I knew someone over there would question that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Smedley
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:45 PM

Dominant as in more powerful, not dominant as in superior.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:18 AM

Dominant culture in the USA - rubbish, stinks of Hitler.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:33 AM

That's rich coming from the man who wrote the OP!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Acorn4
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 07:59 AM

Having lived in Leicester for the past 30 years or so, I've come to realise that the local lingo is probably the most economical anywhere in the English speaking world:-

"Ey up, mi duck, yergorrabirrabobonyershoe":-

trans:- I say, you appear to have acquired some canine excrement on your foot wear!

"Ey up, gerroffwiya, ah int gorroat!"

trans:- Kindly desist from touching my person, I do not possess what you are seeking!

"Aw ya, ah wonarf frit."

trans:- Really, I was extremely terrified!

Whilst doing a Victorian themed Christmas play at a school I worked at, the leading boy had to pick up a broken picture from the floor and say ;_

"It's a picture of a woman and a little girl!" (13 syllables) -

His first attempt at the line went:-

"Spishwumlilgal" (4 syllables)

We spent the next three weeks trying to restore the missing syllables:-

EAT YOUR HEART OUT, ESSEX!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:07 AM

"Worreewi'erorworreewi'issenn ?"

North Nottinghamshire for "Was he with her or was he by himself ?".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: HuwG
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 10:02 AM

In my book, "dominant" = "fifth chord". However, that is by the by ...

The estuarine accent was common in English football (="soccer") circles about twenty years ago ("That was a beautifuw baw he passed, Michael"). I am convinced it was not an accent, but an affectation; it arrived from nowhere and for some time rivalled even the Bill Shankly growl punctuated by throat-clearings, which previously dominated managers', trainers' and pundits' speech patterns.

I found it to be quite as annoying as other affectations such as the upper class twit of the year's "I say, old chap", the industrial relations use of the word "situation" in every sentence and the emergency services' overuse of "male" and "female" instead of "man" and "woman". The use of this last baffles me. I can accept a stilted, formal style of speech where absolute clarity is required over a squelchy radio channel, but it is quite as easy to confuse "male" with "female" through heavy static as it is to mix up "man" and "woman".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Acorn4
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 11:28 AM

Football commentators English has a comedy value all of its own:-

"We're one nil up but can we stand this entourage they're throwing at us?"

"The ref's stopped the game so he can see what indiscrepancies have been committed!"

"The referee booked him after he scored - he just got a bit over exuberated!"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Acorn4
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:26 PM

Oh..."and if we think we're going to get promoted playing like this we're looking at the world through rose scented glasses!"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 02:12 PM

How about the other word?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Acorn4
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:07 AM

Please?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 11:51 AM

"the upper class twit of the year"

Well we have many working class twits of the year now, do we not??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 01:43 PM

Or worse - track suit bottoms class!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 03:57 AM

What does that make you, Bonzo? You fuckwit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:53 AM

Touched a nerve have we SO?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Gervase
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 09:11 AM

Shh! Sweeney has well-chipped shoulders.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 08:22 AM

It's interesting that most immigrants in Croydon have far better pronounciation of English than many English folks!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Victoriaaaaaar
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 09:03 AM

I take it you mean 'pronUnciation'? ··· though why it should be so is admittedly one of those mysteries...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 3 December 10:02 PM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.