Irritating American names for things

dxhound2005

COVID wrote: »

Genuine question here.
Any examples of the 'superiority complex' thingy?

Off topic and nothing to do with Americans, but some people adopt an air of superiority when they don't like a new development in the language. It does also apply to "Americanisms" being used in Ireland.

An example, which I just heard again on the radio is the attitude to that "awful phrase" wet pubs. It's a perfectly good phrase but because it is new, the defenders of proper English take to their keyboards to demand that it be excised from the language. Whether it will survive as a phrase will only be known in years to come. But in the meantime people should just accept that the language will evolve in whatever way people lead it, and they should get down from their high horses.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/irish-social-media-users-unite-22648348

New Home

To me, it's not annoying because it's new, to me it's annoying because "wet pub" has the same effect on me as "moist". Ugh.

The Continental Op

New Home wrote: »

To me, it's not annoying because it's new, to me it's annoying because "wet pub" has the same effect on me as "moist". Ugh.

Isn't that tautology. A pub by my definition is "wet" anyway?

Edit: But I assume the "wet" is added to distinguish between pubs that sell drink and those that also sell food.

dxhound2005

It's a bit of trade jargon like Gastro Pub or Music Pub, which have also entered the general language. None of them might be in general use in the future.

https://www.greenekingpubs.co.uk/running-a-pub/blog/pub-industry-jargon-and-terminology-glossary

Zaph

Stateofyou wrote: »

Funny enough, that's the same argument many have in the states. I was living there at the time there was a big uproar over Starbucks new 'holiday' cups which said "Happy Holidays" instead of Merry Christmas. :pac:

Happy Holidays actually makes sense in the States because as well as Christmas you have many people there celebrating Hanukkah and, more recently, Kwanzaa, around the same time of the year. It's intended to be more inclusive, but oddly enough the only people you ever hear complaining about it are people who celebrate Christmas.

New Home

The Continental Op wrote: »

Isn't that tautology. A pub by my definition is "wet" anyway?

Edit: But I assume the "wet" is added to distinguish between pubs that sell drink and those that also sell food.

It's not the meaning that grates on my nerves, it's the combination of sounds. Damp, humid, drenched pubs wouldn't have had the same effect on me (although the word damp reminds me of the mouldy/musty smell of old hessian potato sacks and of cold feet).

Edit: Are they wet because there's no soakage to be had? :pac:

New Home

I bet a lot of people are using American words without knowing it, like OK for instance. Theres a scene in Gosford park where Maggie Smith, playing the same kind of role as she did in Downton Abbey a few years later, is talking to somebody who answers "ok". She is taken aback and says condescendingly "OK? What on earth is that?"

The American words that I hate tend to be imported ideologies. Using Libtard at all. Using liberal to mean left. The use of Caucasian. That kind of nonsense.

New Home wrote: »

It's not the meaning that grates on my nerves, it's the combination of sounds. Damp, humid, drenched pubs wouldn't have had the same effect on me (although the word damp reminds me of the mouldy/musty smell of old hessian potato sacks and of cold feet.

All of those would annoy me just as much. Drink-only or Kitchen-free or non-food pubs. There are plenty of options.

Zaph

Zaph wrote: »

Happy Holidays actually makes sense in the States because as well as Christmas you have many people there celebrating Hanukkah and, more recently, Kwanzaa, around the same time of the year. It's intended to be more inclusive, but oddly enough the only people you ever hear complaining about it are people who celebrate Christmas.

About 2 percent of the population is Jewish - some of whom celebrate Christmas, and while 12% of the population is black they are mostly Christian. I think I it fair to say that the major holiday celebrated around that time is Christmas.

The Continental Op

I know we probably do it just as much but I've noticed that when the word unique is used in American TV they don't actually know what the word means and have to try and embellish the uniqueness by saying very unique or most unique or something similar. You can't have anything more unique than something thats unique because unique means its a one off, you can't be more one off than one off!

/Rant over.

dxhound2005

dxhound2005 wrote: »

There's no right or wrong, that part is right. You are going to have a lifetime of problems if you do not recognise that in the modern world, regional variations can become international, al much quicker than in the past. The much maligned "revert" started in Indian English, and went from regional to standard in dictionaries, in the last few years.

Well, there is right and wrong in language. Even if some changes get accepted over time they just add to the number of words that are are legitimate, which is vastly smaller than the number of words that aren't legitimate in English, or any other language.

Most changes are benign, the rise of revert as opposed to reply is not so much. Why? Because it replaces a perfectly good word already, and muddies the other meaning of revert.

Hangdogroad

The Continental Op wrote: »

Isn't that tautology. A pub by my definition is "wet" anyway?

Edit: But I assume the "wet" is added to distinguish between pubs that sell drink and those that also sell food.

Wet pub conjurs up images of someone who's pissed themselves or spilt beer down their front. Theres something oddly repellant about it.

Wibbs

The Continental Op wrote: »

I know we probably do it just as much but I've noticed that when the word unique is used in American TV they don't actually know what the word means and have to try and embellish the uniqueness by saying very unique or most unique or something similar. You can't have anything more unique than something thats unique because unique means its a one off, you can't be more one off than one off!

/Rant over.

In fairness that's come from marketing speak and is pretty much worldwide. "Rare", "Limited edition", "Unique", "Authentic" and all that sh1te. Usually tacked onto stuff that is made in the many thousands.

Stateofyou

Wibbs wrote: »

So I'll be offended on your behalf...

Not sure what you're saying here Wibbs. I've got in-laws (family), family and friends of mine living in the US, and American friends here. I also lived there for many years. So I know first hand a lot of these posts are bs and as already discussed, we do many of the same things ourselves.

If ever there was an irritating word, it's spuds. :pac:

duridian

New Home wrote: »

It's not the meaning that grates on my nerves, it's the combination of sounds. Damp, humid, drenched pubs wouldn't have had the same effect on me (although the word damp reminds me of the mouldy/musty smell of old hessian potato sacks and of cold feet).

Edit: Are they wet because there's no soakage to be had? :pac:

I believe the reason behind the creation of the term "wet pubs" is to create a negative association with them by describing them in the same way that the markets in Wuhan were being called "wet markets".

I have no dog in this fight I have no connection to the pub trade. I don't drink or visit the pub and have not done so in about a quarter of a century. i simply know marketing tricks and propaganda when I see it, and the nonsensical term "wet pubs" makes no sense in any other context, as "gastro pubs" alongside selling food also serve the beverages that might be used to explain "wetness" in a supposedly "wet pub".

The Continental Op

duridian wrote: »

I believe the reason behind the creation of the term "wet pubs" is to create a negative association with them by describing them in the same way that the markets in Wuhan were being called "wet markets".

I have no dog in this fight I have no connection to the pub trade. I don't drink or visit the pub and have not done so in about a quarter of a century. i simply know marketing tricks and propaganda when I see it, and the nonsensical term "wet pubs" makes no sense in any other context, as "gastro pubs" alongside selling food also serve the beverages that might be used to explain "wetness" in a supposedly "wet pub".

The problem for me is that when I hear the words "gastro pub" I immedeatly think of gastroenteritis - infectious diarrhea, so that has a bit of a negative association :D

dxhound2005

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, there is right and wrong in language. Even if some changes get accepted over time they just add to the number of words that are are legitimate, which is vastly smaller than the number of words that aren't legitimate in English, or any other language.

Most changes are benign, the rise of revert as opposed to reply is not so much. Why? Because it replaces a perfectly good word already, and muddies the other meaning of revert.

Reply is a bit muddy itself. The original meaning was to re-fold. And it became a noun long after it was only a verb, something else (usually the other way round) which annoys people in modern times. It is wrong to think that words can only ever have one meaning (or pronunciation or spelling). And the concept of benign changes is not something I recognise.

http://www.finedictionary.com/reply.html

For those complaining about happy holidays, it is derived from Christianity just like Christmas. Holy Days.

dxhound2005

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Reply is a bit muddy itself. The original meaning was to re-fold.

its from the Latin to fold back, in English borrowed from French it has always meant the same as respond, answer or retort etc.

And it became a noun long after it was only a verb, something else (usually the other way round) which annoys people in modern times. It is wrong to think that words can only ever have one meaning (or pronunciation or spelling). And the concept of benign changes is not something I recognise.

Mostly straw man arguments here but in my opinion using a word which has meant something else for centuries to replace a word which has meant something different for centuries ( and which has many synonyms already) is not a benign change of the language.

The idea that every change in any language is good is as mistaken as the belief that all changes are bad. I mean there's plenty of changes that people worry about that are nonsense, like the supposed American use of So at a sentence start, but revert for reply is not needed at all.

For those complaining about happy holidays, it is derived from Christianity just like Christmas. Holy Days.

Only in America is holidays used in this fashion i.e. general days off mandated for most workers based on religious or cultural or others reasons, in non US English its primary meaning is vacation time, all the more reason to not use it outside of the US.

fussyonion

Grilled cheese instead of grilled cheese sandwich.
ParmaZJON instead of parmesan.
Lowkey.
Lit.

dxhound2005

Deleted User wrote: »

i
in my opinion using a word which has meant something else for centuries to replace a word which has meant something different for centuries ( and which has many synonyms already) is not a benign change of the language.

This is the crux of the matter. In every age language purists assume that the way things are in their lifetime is the way that they have always been. And they insist that they have to remain the same in perpetuity. They were and are wrong on the first count, and they have been proved to be losers on the second so far.

Revert did not replace Reply, it is simply another way of saying Respond. If it survives or if it fades away is not benign or malignant, it is just the way things evolve. And complaining that people are using so called "Americanisms" in Ireland is a bit odd, seeing that English in America came from this part of the world.

dxhound2005

dxhound2005 wrote: »

This is the crux of the matter. In every age language purists assume that the way things are in their lifetime is the way that they have always been.

And they insist that they have to remain the same in perpetuity. They were and are wrong on the first count, and they have been proved to be losers on the second so far.

FFS. I have clearly said I am not a purist. My very first line on this thread what that we tend to use Americanisms we dont even are Americanisms - like OK.

I am fine with many changes but not this particular change, the one under discussion. For someone who defends the English language as she is spoken, you aren't very good at comprehension.

Revert did not replace Reply, it is simply another way of saying Respond.

Case in point with regards to comprehension - I didn't say revert did totally replace reply, I said there are other synonyms for reply and revert is clearly unnecessary and potentially confusing, as it uses an existing word which means something totally different. I don't think revert will in fact ever leave the corporate world, which does tend to coin its own neologisms which dominate LinkedIn and leave the rest of us unmoved, outside that environment anyway.

If it survives or if it fades away is not benign or malignant, it is just the way things evolve. And complaining that people are using so called "Americanisms" in Ireland is a bit odd, seeing that English in America came from this part of the world.

Of course the English in America came from England to begin with. Then it changed, or the English spoken in "British or Hiberno English changed.

Some of those changes were acceptable across the pond, some weren't. Despite your idea that everything goes, it doesnt, even the most fervent descriptionist would agree on that.

dxhound2005

Even with my poor comprehension, I know that revert can mean reply. Language purists around the English speaking world will foam at the mouth for another few years, and then it will just be normal.

https://medium.com/aubergine-solutions/use-with-caution-revert-214aa68c1a21#:~:text=If%20you%20have%20gotten%20an,1.

Lewis_Benson

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Even with my poor comprehension, I know that revert can mean reply. Language purists around the English speaking world will foam at the mouth for another few years, and then it will just be normal.

https://medium.com/aubergine-solutions/use-with-caution-revert-214aa68c1a21#:~:text=If%20you%20have%20gotten%20an,1.

No.

Gorteen

I am "super" excited..... "super" nice...... "super" intelligent...
The use of the word super in this format drives me mad!!!!

764dak

This thread seems like garbage but I would say using "nonplussed" to mean "unperturbed" is bad.

"Nonplus" means "to confuse." So "nonplussed" as a past participle and adjective should mean "confused."

So the nouns "nonplus," "nonplusser," and "nonplussing" would mean the opposite to many Americans.

dxhound2005

I wasn't aware that Nonplussed could mean Unperturbed. It is not in the only online dictionary I checked. Another meaning is listed there of which I was also unaware, To cause to feel indifferent or bored. But that is either in the process of being accepted as standard, or will wither and die. Dictionaries do not decide, they just report what is current.

non·plus (nŏn-plŭs′)
tr.v. non·plussed, non·plus·sing, non·plus·ses also non·plused or non·plus·ing or non·plus·es
1. To put at a loss as to what to think, say, or do; bewilder.
2. Usage Problem To cause to feel indifferent or bored.
n.
A state of bewilderment or perplexity.
[From Latin nōn plūs, no more : nōn, not; see non- + plūs, more; see pelə- in Indo-European roots.]
Usage Note: The verb nonplus, from the Latin phrase nōn plūs, "not more," is well established with the meaning "to surprise and bewilder." The verb and its participial adjective nonplussed often imply that the affected person is at a loss for words. This use of the word was acceptable to 90 percent of the Usage Panel in our 2013 survey in the sentence The scientists were completely nonplussed—the apparatus had not acted at all as they had expected. However, the word is frequently used to mean "to make indifferent, bore," as if the plus part of the word meant "to overcome with excitement." This usage is still controversial and should probably be avoided, since it may well be viewed as a mistake. In our 2013 survey, 57 percent of the Panel rejected the sentence The nine panelists showed little emotion during the broadcast and were generally nonplussed by the outcome. This percentage is almost unchanged from the 61 percent of the Panel who rejected the same sentence in 2001.

Zaph

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Even with my poor comprehension, I know that revert can mean reply. Language purists around the English speaking world will foam at the mouth for another few years, and then it will just be normal.

https://medium.com/aubergine-solutions/use-with-caution-revert-214aa68c1a21#:~:text=If%20you%20have%20gotten%20an,1.

Even if it's technically being used in a manner not consistent with the true meaning of the word, I don't have a huge problem with someone saying they'll revert to me. What I do have a problem with is them telling me that they'll revert back to me. For me, it's nearly on the same level as people who can't differentiate between lose/loose or their/there/they're.

Samsgirl

440Hertz wrote: »

Sure we've universities that use terms like Michaelmas, Hillary and Trinity terms, borrowed from Oxford & Cambridge.

UCC replaced them after modularisation, with Teaching Period 1, Teaching Period 2 and Teaching Period 3...

The courts use the terms Michaelmas, Hillary and Trinity to refer to different sittings.

Pasteur.

Pump and Dump..

In relation to stocks and shares

Stihl waters

Pasteur. wrote: »

Pump and Dump..

In relation to stocks and shares

Is that where that term comes from, I've only ever heard it used in relation to one night stands

tringle

One I have heard recently is "on accident" instead of by accident. It happened on accident. First time I heard it was on an unscripted TV show i I thought it was just the person's style of talking. Second time was in a interview but can't remember where and third time was an Instagram story where a well spoken chef/food writer explained how this recipe was developed on accident when they didnt have X ingredient available. Is this a new thing, has anyone else heard it. Its only in the past 4 weeks i have come across it.

Pasteur.

Stihl waters wrote: »

Is that where that term comes from, I've only ever heard it used in relation to one night stands

I would say so

Never thought of yours

dxhound2005

tringle wrote: »

One I have heard recently is "on accident" instead of by accident. It happened on accident. First time I heard it was on an unscripted TV show i I thought it was just the person's style of talking. Second time was in a interview but can't remember where and third time was an Instagram story where a well spoken chef/food writer explained how this recipe was developed on accident when they didnt have X ingredient available. Is this a new thing, has anyone else heard it. Its only in the past 4 weeks i have come across it.

I haven't heard it, but the internet says it is an informal speech idiom. Probably derived from a perceived opposite of On Purpose. The question could be asked why is On Purpose OK, but not On Accident?

Antares35

Recipes that call for "cups" of ingredients instead of proper measures!

Antares35

Stihl waters wrote: »

Is that where that term comes from, I've only ever heard it used in relation to one night stands

I always thought it was for nursing mothers who want to drink!

legrand

Basil (Bay-zil) and Oregano (ArayGanO)

boardise

'Different than' really grates .

The proper correct form is ' different from' as can be seen from its Latin origin.
Another common acceptable usage is 'different to' .

But 'different than' ??....... come the fúck off it . No wonder they ended up with Trump.

bonzodog2

'In back of' - grates on my ears but kinda makes sense compared to 'in front of'

Hamsterchops

tringle wrote: »

One I have heard recently is "on accident" instead of by accident. It happened on accident.

Have never come across this :cool:

It's obviously 'by accident', discussion over. I turned on the alarm by accident.

dxhound2005

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Have never come across this :cool:

It's obviously 'by accident', discussion over. I turned on the alarm by accident.

But did you? You could have turned it on accidentally on purpose.

Hamsterchops

dxhound2005 wrote: »

But did you? You could have turned it on accidentally on purpose.

I hid the toys on purpose, then I tripped over them on accident? Really

whisky_galore

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Off topic and nothing to do with Americans, but some people adopt an air of superiority when they don't like a new development in the language. It does also apply to "Americanisms" being used in Ireland.

An example, which I just heard again on the radio is the attitude to that "awful phrase" wet pubs. It's a perfectly good phrase but because it is new, the defenders of proper English take to their keyboards to demand that it be excised from the language. Whether it will survive as a phrase will only be known in years to come. But in the meantime people should just accept that the language will evolve in whatever way people lead it, and they should get down from their high horses.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/irish-social-media-users-unite-22648348

Imo it's an awful phrase as it's yet another for the Covid Catchphrase bingo.

Once CV eventually goes away, the phrase and its constant honking by media and others will hopefully disappear with it.

dxhound2005

Covid catchphrase bingo. I like that.

Wibbs

Antares35 wrote: »

Recipes that call for "cups" of ingredients instead of proper measures!

That was a thing on this side of the Atlantic not that long ago. From a time when fewer kitchen utensils had measures. It's a handy shorthand.

Thinking on it there are vanishingly few "Americanisms" that I even notice, as they're just local and interesting variations on a theme. I only notice Americanisms on non Americans. Irish people with woeful mid Atlantic accents as an example. I've even on occasion heard the dreaded vocal fry and rising tone sentences from Irish people, almost exclusively young women. If you're Californian it's irritating enough(and from what I've gathered Americans can't abide it either), but fair enough, but if you're from Waterford? Eh. No. Stop.

One thing that has long puzzled me is the American insistence on fahrenheit, many decades after the rest of the world went the far more logical centigrade. The US military and scientists went mostly metric, but fahrenheit remains.

Invidious

boardise wrote: »

'Different than' really grates .

The proper correct form is ' different from' as can be seen from its Latin origin.
Another common acceptable usage is 'different to' .

But 'different than' ??....... come the fúck off it . No wonder they ended up with Trump.

"Different than" has been used in written and spoken English since the fifteenth century, hundreds of years before the United States came into existence. It's a bit absurd then to call it an "Americanism."

astrofool

Wibbs wrote: »

One thing that has long puzzled me is the American insistence on fahrenheit, many decades after the rest of the world went the far more logical centigrade. The US military and scientists went mostly metric, but fahrenheit remains.

The important thing is that everything backend is done in metric and C, so the machine pours 355ml into a can, and then label it 12oz. (they also distribute their power at 220v, then kind of go crazy with it at the house level, their 220v plugs for driers etc. are crazy dangerous).

Antares35

Wibbs wrote: »

That was a thing on this side of the Atlantic not that long ago. From a time when fewer kitchen utensils had measures. It's a handy shorthand.

Thinking on it there are vanishingly few "Americanisms" that I even notice, as they're just local and interesting variations on a theme. I only notice Americanisms on non Americans. Irish people with woeful mid Atlantic accents as an example. I've even on occasion heard the dreaded vocal fry and rising tone sentences from Irish people, almost exclusively young women. If you're Californian it's irritating enough(and from what I've gathered Americans can't abide it either), but fair enough, but if you're from Waterford? Eh. No. Stop.

One thing that has long puzzled me is the American insistence on fahrenheit, many decades after the rest of the world went the far more logical centigrade. The US military and scientists went mostly metric, but fahrenheit remains.

Hardly handy if you don't still have said cups in your kitchen while measuring out ingredients.

Wibbs

astrofool wrote: »

they also distribute their power at 220v, then kind of go crazy with it at the house level, their 220v plugs for driers etc. are crazy dangerous.

I understood the US runs on 110volts(well technically 120 +/- a percentage either way) not 220?

ED E

Wibbs wrote: »

I understood the US runs on 110volts(well technically 120 +/- a percentage either way) not 220?

Lets not derail too much but the US has both in residential. 110 is too limited so they double up for large devices.

Basically L + N = 110v, L + L = 220v.

Das Reich

Rothko wrote: »

Not true at all.

And where are you from? Because all Europeans (non british islanders) and non Europeans I met have exactly this impression from Ireland soon as they arrive.

astrofool

Wibbs wrote: »

I understood the US runs on 110volts(well technically 120 +/- a percentage either way) not 220?

There's a great youtube channel called Technology Connections that explains it all in a nice simple way (and also if you want to know why clicky switches are good). That might be your Sunday ruined.