The English Language In Translation

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

They probably spoke Scots, which isn't English although it's closely related. Since you don't know what region they are from, we don't know what dialect of Scots they spoke, but at the time you're referring to it wouldn't have been much influenced by English (now we have TV and radio in our houses all the time. Back then, much less so).

I'm Scottish, but I don't speak Scots: I speak English with a Scottish accent and few Scots words and syntax idioms. This is because of where I grew up (a post Gaelic speaking area of the Highlands). But if you're grandparents were from, say, Ayrshire or Aberdeenshire, they'd have spoken a very local dialect of Scots with a huge number of words that aren't in English and with non English grammar and syntax rules.

(Scots didn't have a standard literary form after the Union of Crowns, and so the local dialects varied greatly from each other in vocabulary without having a "standard dialect" like English English does. Although Burns did have roots both in Ayrshire and the Mearns, where his paternal ancestors farmed. So his Scots was wider than just local to Ayrshire. In the 20th Century, Hugh MacDiarmid tried to create a standardised version of Scots, which he called Lallans. It's sometimes pejoratively referred to as Synthetic Scots. It didn't really take off, except as a written form, but was more heavily based on the Borders dialect than he realised).

If you're interested in dialect and language the two books I'd recommend are:

A Mouthful of Air: Language and Languages, Especially English by Anthony Burgess.

Language Change: progress or decay? By Jean Aitchison.

This is enormously helpful! Thanks so much! I have never even heard of this language before.

There's nothing at all special about my family, but for some reason, I am fascinated by them. Very traditional looking Scottish American people, of their era. And of course, the usual poor-immigrants-make-good story as to their grandchildren & great-grandchildren.

My grandpa had this very sinister snake tattoo that wrapped his arm from wrist to bicep, and had fought WWI in the Royal British Navy. Strong as an ox until he died in his 90's. My grandma had snow white hair, very long, worn in a bun and was a tad overweight. Probably had been quite pretty as a young woman. I don't think I ever aw he in anything but a dress, and rarely without an apron.

I lost my own parents when I was young, and I guess this helps "fill in the blanks".

You guys are so generous! Want some LeBron James gear?

(You do know who he is, amirite? Greatest NBA player in history? Lives in my city?)



LOL.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

There's not a single person in this country under the age of 25 who can spell, and that's a scientific fact.

I was able to notice the changes to my spelling and grammar before and after the introduction of the personal computer in the workplace. I went from being able to spell, to being able to guess at spelling well enough to prompt the machine to underline my word, to relying on my machine to spell for me. Even worse, relying on it to check my grammar.

I have, it is humiliating to admit, submitted a brief to the highest court in Florida, extremely important case, which for years after I was so proud until I reread and notice all the "which" had become "witch".

That shame burn never really goes away.......

LOL.

 

[19force8]

At the moment I'm watching "The £15 billion railway" on the BBC. Aside from being an astonishing piece of engineering there's a plethora of British accents. If you want pure Derby (which still sends shivers down my spine) listen to the guys in the Derby Carriage Works building the trains in the first part of the second programme.

 

[Corax]

And, most mysteriously; why do you all sound American when you sing? Even "Happy birthday"! Or is that just a tv trope?

I don't think people with a Southern English accent do.

However... can you do a passable Irish accent? If so, try seguing from speaking in it to singing - voila, American vocals.

I only realised this when getting annoyed that the Northern Irish band Therapy? were 'putting on' an American accent, then trying to sing their songs myself in an Irish one. Turns out they weren't putting anything on at all.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Basically, what ElizabethofYork said. 'Pet' and 'Love' are just everyday speak for Northumberland. 'Pet' in particular' is very well known for that area but less common outside of the north east, but 'Love' you'll find everywhere, especially up north.

"love" is variable. I am not sure I (as a man) would use it these days - some women find it offensive.

In Yorkshire, it can be used between men the same way as "mate" would be in London. This didn't half confuse me (a Londonder) when I got called "love" by some hefty bloke when I was working on a building site somewhere in Yorkshire...

We moved to Derby when I was a kid. After a couple of days my sister (four at the time) was in tears because people thought she was a duck.

someone i used to deal with on the phone when I was in Lincolnshire ended almost every sentence with "duck". you felt like quacking after a conversation with him

I speak English with a Scottish accent and few Scots words and syntax idioms.

I remember being confused by some characters in the Beano when I was little using phrases that seemed (from an English perspective) wrong - something like "this needs done" sticks in the memory - it's standard Scottish English, but in England it would be "this needs doing" or if you're being formal "this needs to be done"

As for locality of accents, it's still quite local. As a native of South East London, I am not and have never been 'cockney'. Don't think it's quite as localised as it used to be (people move around more, kids grow up hearing more regional accents on the telly - it used to be RP on the telly / radio and local accents round home) - 30 years ago, I could tell the difference between (say) Woolwich, Catford, Croydon (places maybe 5 or 6 miles apart) with a fairly good degree of accuracy.

I've read somewhere that in Victorian times, you could place someone within a few streets in London.

 

[danny la rouge]

I remember being confused by some characters in the Beano when I was little using phrases that seemed (from an English perspective) wrong - something like "this needs done" sticks in the memory - it's standard Scottish English, but in England it would be "this needs doing" or if you're being formal "this needs to be done".

Two things: first, I was shocked when they made the Dennis the Menace cartoons for TV and he didn't have a Dundee accent. It was never stated where he was from; I just assumed. But still. It was like Superman opening his mouth and he was Australian or something.

Secondly, I am only just learning now that "this needs done" isn't Standard English. Does that follow for other constructs? Would you not say "that floor needs washed"? Or "that door needs closed"? And so on?

This is interesting. I'll have to investigate. There's so many things I didn't know were Scottish English only. Like "outwith". I think my first wordprocessor alerted me to the fact that that wasn't Standard English.

Until I met Mrs La Rouge (she's English) I had no idea real live people said "shall". I thought it was a fossil word only found in "you shall go to the ball, Cinderella!" I still struggle with the distinction between shall and will, though I've had it explained several times. In Scotland people only say "will".

Conversely Mrs la Rouge in everyday speech uses "bought" and "brought" interchangeably (she's from the Stoke on Trent area). She says she knows the difference, but I don't see the evidence.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Would you not say "that floor needs washed"? Or "that door needs closed"? And so on?

No. it would be "that floor needs to be washed" if you're being formal or more usually "that door needs closing"

This is interesting. I'll have to investigate. There's so many things I didn't know were Scottish English only. Like "outwith". I think my first wordprocessor alerted me to the fact that that wasn't Standard English.

When I worked for a company with HQ in Glasgow, but at an office in Berkshire, some of my colleagues were confused by some words in e-mails from head office, like "outwith". doing stuff "timeously" was another one that took a bit of translation.

Conversely Mrs la Rouge in everyday speech uses "bought" and "brought" interchangeably (she's from the Stoke on Trent area)

there's probably clough all you can do about it now. (i've lived in n staffs as well)

 

[Mrs Miggins]

I have never heard "this needs done" and it sounds completely wrong to me.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

I have never heard "this needs done" and it sounds completely wrong to me.

you obviously didn't read the beano when you were little

 

[Mrs Miggins]

you obviously didn't read the beano when you were little

But I did! I was obsessed! Was that in there then? I guess I didn't notice.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

But I did! I was obsessed! Was that in there then? I guess I didn't notice.

i didn't notice it often, but did now and then. for some reason i can remember 'roger the dodger' using it.

i also remember that most buses in the beano etc (when i read it in the 70s) were these -

Dundee corporation bought about 30 of them from London Transport (who by that time had slightly more buses than they knew what to do with) in the mid 50s

 

[danny la rouge]

there's probably clough all you can do about it now. (i've lived in n staffs as well)

And it would be too much myther anyway.

 

[DotCommunist]

I've heard 'this needs done' and usually in a bad tempered context, followed by a 'now' most often. If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well it were done quickly

 

[redsquirrel]

This page: https://www.quora.com/How-many-accents-are-there-in-the-British-Isles-and-North-America

...claims that there 56 accents of English in the British Isles to only 42 in the US. But it also lumps all Westcountry accents besides Bristol into one group, which is just plain wrong. And if there's one single 'East Midlands' accent I've never heard it. If someone from Derby comes here to Nottingham you can easily tell, and not just from the shit on their shoes.

Likewise there are subtle but distinct differences within the Yorkshire accent

I have never heard "this needs done" and it sounds completely wrong to me.

New to me too, but I rather like it. Going to have to try and use it now.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Likewise there are subtle but distinct differences within the Yorkshire accent

indeed. Leeds is different to Bratford, and both different from Sheffield or Hull (and no doubt from accents in the North Riding.) I didn't really stay in Leeds long enough to get the hang of whether south Leeds and north Leeds are different

 

[Leo2]

Language and the customary use thereof is, as we all know, a social minefield. I was brought up to use a fairly innocuous form of RP, but as a boarder at a particular institution for most of my schooling, I occasionally fell into a word usage known as notions, and other slang peculiar to that and a couple of other such institutions, in my younger days.

I am careful to avoid that usage now that I am out of school, because it caused perplexity in places like Australia and the United States, and a degree of hostility amongst certain demographics in the UK. (We British have made class consciousness into an art form. ) Now that I am a man, and no longer see as through a glass darkly, utterances such as 'toy time' and 'div' have been put away with other childish things.

Whilst I avoid such references as being of no utility outside a particular environment, I try to use the English language as correctly as I am able. Socioeconomic and geographic variations (all of which add colour and interest) aside, the purpose of language is communication, and if we wish to convey our thoughts to others - this is best done with the minimum of grammatical solecisms and spelling vagaries, which only serve to distract from the message, and on occasion - irritate.

And perhaps we should not forget the reason for these lyrics from "My Fair Lady" -

"An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other Englishman despise him."


I have not been here long enough to comment upon this place, but I have been a member of a US political forum since I was 12 (I joined at an age where all things American appeared glamorous,) and I am sometimes surprised at the level of spelling and grammar encountered at that place - this from highly intelligent and educated people. I hope I'm not being too demanding, but while I expect a certain latitude in informal conversation, I am a little surprised when a form of publishing (which includes these fora,) contains that sort of thing. It is simplicity itself (and a mark of respect for one's readers) to proof read a post, and correct obvious errors, before clicking the 'submit' button.

Make no mistake, I am as guilty as the next man of spelling errors and grammatical solecisms, but these are usually down to ignorance, rather than lack of concern - I am hinting at no personal superiority in the use of language.

But I am mindful of the words of Doctor Johnson -

"What is written without effort, is seldom read with pleasure."

 

[DotCommunist]

these are usually down to ignorance, rather than lack of concern

accuracy in language is to be applauded but remember where roots come into play and common usage. Colloquialism or dialect. The hostility you might notice that a schooled RP accent garners has very valid reasons. A language is a dialect with an army etc

on general terms, I take the sabbath to be made for man and not the other way round. Conveyance of meaning is the key. If you can make that beautiful and elegant at the same time then bonus points.

Socioeconomic and geographic variations (all of which add colour and interest) aside, the purpose of language is communication, and if we wish to convey our thoughts to others - this is best done with the minimum of grammatical solecisms and spelling vagaries, which only serve to distract from the message, and on occasion - irritate.

all language, all words and formations have chains of meaning and shades of usage. Simple mistakes are annoying, yes and all the more so as I am guilty of basic errors that I know better but am too lazy to edit on here. But to elide the 'colourful' with the inaccurate shows that you really have learned some lessons in boarding school.

 

[MrSpikey]

Two things: first, I was shocked when they made the Dennis the Menace cartoons for TV and he didn't have a Dundee accent. It was never stated where he was from; I just assumed. But still. It was like Superman opening his mouth and he was Australian or something.

Secondly, I am only just learning now that "this needs done" isn't Standard English. Does that follow for other constructs? Would you not say "that floor needs washed"? Or "that door needs closed"? And so on?

This is interesting. I'll have to investigate. There's so many things I didn't know were Scottish English only. Like "outwith". I think my first wordprocessor alerted me to the fact that that wasn't Standard English.

Until I met Mrs La Rouge (she's English) I had no idea real live people said "shall". I thought it was a fossil word only found in "you shall go to the ball, Cinderella!" I still struggle with the distinction between shall and will, though I've had it explained several times. In Scotland people only say "will".

Conversely Mrs la Rouge in everyday speech uses "bought" and "brought" interchangeably (she's from the Stoke on Trent area). She says she knows the difference, but I don't see the evidence.

Perhaps it all depends on where you stay...or where you live.

 

[spanglechick]

Language and the customary use thereof is, as we all know, a social minefield. I was brought up to use a fairly innocuous form of RP, but as a boarder at a particular institution for most of my schooling, I occasionally fell into a word usage known as notions, and other slang peculiar to that and a couple of other such institutions, in my younger days.

I am careful to avoid that usage now that I am out of school, because it caused perplexity in places like Australia and the United States, and a degree of hostility amongst certain demographics in the UK. (We British have made class consciousness into an art form. ) Now that I am a man, and no longer see as through a glass darkly, utterances such as 'toy time' and 'div' have been put away with other childish things.

Whilst I avoid such references as being of no utility outside a particular environment, I try to use the English language as correctly as I am able. Socioeconomic and geographic variations (all of which add colour and interest) aside, the purpose of language is communication, and if we wish to convey our thoughts to others - this is best done with the minimum of grammatical solecisms and spelling vagaries, which only serve to distract from the message, and on occasion - irritate.

And perhaps we should not forget the reason for these lyrics from "My Fair Lady" -

"An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other Englishman despise him."


I have not been here long enough to comment upon this place, but I have been a member of a US political forum since I was 12 (I joined at an age where all things American appeared glamorous,) and I am sometimes surprised at the level of spelling and grammar encountered at that place - this from highly intelligent and educated people. I hope I'm not being too demanding, but while I expect a certain latitude in informal conversation, I am a little surprised when a form of publishing (which includes these fora,) contains that sort of thing. It is simplicity itself (and a mark of respect for one's readers) to proof read a post, and correct obvious errors, before clicking the 'submit' button.

Make no mistake, I am as guilty as the next man of spelling errors and grammatical solecisms, but these are usually down to ignorance, rather than lack of concern - I am hinting at no personal superiority in the use of language.

But I am mindful of the words of Doctor Johnson -

"What is written without effort, is seldom read with pleasure."

No doubt you did speak in RP, but that only refers to sounds. The content of your post seems to be about word choice, slang and the rest, so you should have written "standard English" instead.

 

[danny la rouge]

Perhaps it all depends on where you stay...or where you live.

Aye.

 

[Leo2]

No doubt you did speak in RP, but that only refers to sounds. The content of your post seems to be about word choice, slang and the rest, so you should have written "standard English" instead.

Good point - I was using RP in too general a manner, as it refers specifically to pronunciation - I sit corrected.

I am a bit wary of terms like 'standard English' as they imply a single universal standard for English usage, but I know what you mean.

And BTW, do you agree with my premise that we should endeavour to write as correctly as we are able (whilst acknowledging local idiom,) - particularly when engaging in this form of publishing?

I'm merely curious.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

I have never heard "this needs done" and it sounds completely wrong to me.

It's not ungrammatical, but it is "passive voice". Considered to be undesirable in communication. "Please clean the floor" vs. "This floor needs cleaning."

Not 100% sure that's true in other countries, but it is in the US.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Language and the customary use thereof is, as we all know, a social minefield. I was brought up to use a fairly innocuous form of RP, but as a boarder at a particular institution for most of my schooling, I occasionally fell into a word usage known as notions, and other slang peculiar to that and a couple of other such institutions, in my younger days.

I am careful to avoid that usage now that I am out of school, because it caused perplexity in places like Australia and the United States, and a degree of hostility amongst certain demographics in the UK. (We British have made class consciousness into an art form. ) Now that I am a man, and no longer see as through a glass darkly, utterances such as 'toy time' and 'div' have been put away with other childish things.

Whilst I avoid such references as being of no utility outside a particular environment, I try to use the English language as correctly as I am able. Socioeconomic and geographic variations (all of which add colour and interest) aside, the purpose of language is communication, and if we wish to convey our thoughts to others - this is best done with the minimum of grammatical solecisms and spelling vagaries, which only serve to distract from the message, and on occasion - irritate.

And perhaps we should not forget the reason for these lyrics from "My Fair Lady" -

"An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other Englishman despise him."


I have not been here long enough to comment upon this place, but I have been a member of a US political forum since I was 12 (I joined at an age where all things American appeared glamorous,) and I am sometimes surprised at the level of spelling and grammar encountered at that place - this from highly intelligent and educated people. I hope I'm not being too demanding, but while I expect a certain latitude in informal conversation, I am a little surprised when a form of publishing (which includes these fora,) contains that sort of thing. It is simplicity itself (and a mark of respect for one's readers) to proof read a post, and correct obvious errors, before clicking the 'submit' button.

Make no mistake, I am as guilty as the next man of spelling errors and grammatical solecisms, but these are usually down to ignorance, rather than lack of concern - I am hinting at no personal superiority in the use of language.

But I am mindful of the words of Doctor Johnson -

"What is written without effort, is seldom read with pleasure."

Americans harbor the idea that the less well-educated a person is, the more honest he is. Even in our Supreme Court decisions, you can see the Justices attempt to be "plain spoken". It's a rather stupid idea, IMO.

The posts on here -- and 99% of the written communication I produce -- need to be easily understood by anyone with an 8th grade education. That means fewer "$10 words" and for sure, no ridiculously long run-on sentences, etc.

But to take that a step further, and abandon the rules of spelling and grammar altogether, is likewise nonsense. I ask whether you will meet me for lunch. If you reply "As if that could be missed!" am I meant to know whether you are coming? A dependent clause is still not a full sentence.

This is not limited to casual writing. I would say I found serious grammar errors in almost every contract or settlement offer I was tendered by the other side. Usually I corrected them, but not always. Someone should teach American law students the potential malpractice hazards that can arise from using "irregardless" carelessly!

Or else old sharks like me may just bite.

 

[Mrs Miggins]

It's not ungrammatical, but it is "passive voice". Considered to be undesirable in communication. "Please clean the floor" vs. "This floor needs cleaning."

Not 100% sure that's true in other countries, but it is in the US.

It sounds completely grammatically incorrect to me - the correct forms being "this needs to be done" or "this needs doing". I don't know but it sounds like dialect to me.

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

Do you get taught how to diagram a sentence, in grammar school? The parts of speech? This has fallen out of favor here completely. My own kid was only able to master grammar because she studied German for 6 years.

How are kids supposed to know grammar if it isn't taught? Osmosis?

 

[Mrs Miggins]

Americans harbor the idea that the less well-educated a person is, the more honest he is. Even in our Supreme Court decisions, you can see the Justices attempt to be "plain spoken". It's a rather stupid idea, IMO.

The posts on here -- and 99% of the written communication I produce -- need to be easily understood by anyone with an 8th grade education. That means fewer "$10 words" and for sure, no ridiculously long run-on sentences, etc.

I think in he UK, trying to write things in what would be called "plain English" is about writing clearly and without jargon or using overcomplicated language so that what you write is clearly understood.

And sorry but no wonder your country is fucked up if your people believe that someone is more honest the less well educated they are. That's seriously messed up but it goes at least some way to explaining president Trump.

 

[Mrs Miggins]

Do you get taught how to diagram a sentence, in grammar school? The parts of speech? This has fallen out of favor here completely. My own kid was only able to master grammar because she studied German for 6 years.

How are kids supposed to know grammar if it isn't taught? Osmosis?

No we don't - or at least did not when I went to school. I too got much better at grammar through learning other languages! I think the expectation is osmosis so no wonder so many people are shit at it

 

[Pinkie_Flamingo]

No we don't - or at least did not when I went to school. I too got much better at grammar through learning other languages! I think the expectation is osmosis so no wonder so many people are shit at it

It's hard to hold a student's attention with such dry material, but my goodness! How are they meant to know what the tenses of speech are, otherwise?

We have a HUGE problem with Americans using past perfect as past tense, thinking it "sounds fancier". And the use of "borrow" to mean "loan"!

I cannot watch those TV judge shows anymore, because I scream at the tv to correct their tortured grammar.

At this rate, we'll be communicating with shadow puppets in another decade.

 

[Leo2]

Americans harbor the idea that the less well-educated a person is, the more honest he is. Even in our Supreme Court decisions, you can see the Justices attempt to be "plain spoken". It's a rather stupid idea, IMO.

The posts on here -- and 99% of the written communication I produce -- need to be easily understood by anyone with an 8th grade education. That means fewer "$10 words" and for sure, no ridiculously long run-on sentences, etc.

But to take that a step further, and abandon the rules of spelling and grammar altogether, is likewise nonsense. I ask whether you will meet me for lunch. If you reply "As if that could be missed!" am I meant to know whether you are coming? A dependent clause is still not a full sentence.

This is not limited to casual writing. I would say I found serious grammar errors in almost every contract or settlement offer I was tendered by the other side. Usually I corrected them, but not always. Someone should teach American law students the potential malpractice hazards that can arise from using "irregardless" carelessly!

Or else old sharks like me may just bite.

Lol, would that I enjoyed your command of the English language! However desirable the use of 'plain language' undoubtedly is; much depends upon what is understood by that term, and what is the subject under discussion. To me, 'plain language' can mean the employment of common terms in a grammatical structure - not the misuse of the noun 'loan' for the verb 'lend', or nonsensical, made-up terms such as 'irregardless'. Jargon is to be avoided in all normal conversation, but technical terms can be difficult to avoid when discussing technical or professional matters. I suspect one cannot avoid terms such as 'habeas corpus' without extensive explanation and reference to history going back to Magna Carta.

But to someone who enjoys the old-fashioned pastime of reading; the use of what some people regard as 'plain language' might detract from the enjoyment of certain poetry and prose. I don't see how a phrase such as "Do not go gentle into that good night ..." could be rendered more effective by the use of plain language, and I for one, would miss the subtle word pictures painted by even so prosaic an author as John le Carre.

 

[JuanTwoThree]

Do you get taught how to diagram a sentence, in grammar school? The parts of speech? This has fallen out of favor here completely. My own kid was only able to master grammar because she studied German for 6 years.

How are kids supposed to know grammar if it isn't taught? Osmosis?

Three passives in that sentence

are they meant

passive

need to be easily understood

passive

This is not limited

passive

Americans swallow all kind of crappy constraints from the likes of Strunk and White, who themselves used passives while attacking them. Do exactly what you like and aim for plainness if you must. But eschewing passives is just unnecessary stupidity.