Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Is that the latest OED, Saffron? My pre-1970 OED specifies DISS-ect as the only pronunciation.

I accept that things have moved on, but not strictly correct to say that DYE-sect is the original pronunciation.


Agree that PGC's bio teacher was a complete wotsit

I believe it listed that as the entry for 1896.


Edited to say "original" in the sense of this being the first recognised entry for pronunciation of this word in the OED, as it was first published in such format. Therefore, "original" being correct in this sense as pertaining to the "original" OED.


Interesting that it was later changed. Is that the full or abridged OED that you have?

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "try and..."

>

> "different to..."

>

> flassid or flaksid? OED says either is correct; a

> former lecturer of mine was altogether less.

> laissez-faire.


One sounds like a nasty case of reflux in the phlegm and the other like a cockney linseed farmer


On the basis that having to use the word at all means you are probably beyond the point of worrying about embarrassment - pronounce it the Spanish way, as in Flaccido Domingo and do it with a flourish.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I feel the same about 'schedule'. It's SHED-ule,

> not bloody SKED-ule.


Same here, I hate it.


Someone I know deliberately says SKED-ule to annoy me (and they take delight in pointing out that "Well.....we don't say SH-OOL, do we" as opposed to "SK-OOL". Grr.

Some of these are examples of American English vs British English. People sometimes comlain that American English is creeping into British English. However, a recent BBC article demonstrated that the current runs both ways. Indeed British English is infiltrating America.


"Britishisms and the Britishisation of American English"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19670686

There is little that irks British defenders of the English language more than Americanisms, which they see creeping insidiously into newspaper columns and everyday conversation. But bit by bit British English is invading America too.

Interesting that most of the terms quoted in your link are British slang rather than 'correct' usage, Saffron.

Overall, I think that we are more influenced by them than they are by us and the impact is much more fundamental. I'm thinking of words like 'billion' - which is now accepted to mean a thousand million (originally US usage) rather than a million million (old UK usage)


American English is influenced by much more than British usage, though - there is a lot of Italian, Spanish and Yiddish influence. I was told that their use of 'hopefully' is a literal translation from German usage. But many of their their strange spellings (losing the u in words such as "colour", for example) come from early attempts to rationalise English spelling, which succeeded in the States but failed to catch on here.


Anyway, here's another of my pet hates - 'DISinterested' when one means 'UNinterested'. That's wrong both in the US and the UK!

Hmm, just to be clear, the point of my post wasn't to further the "us" and "them" attitude. It was simply to demonstrate that the dynamic does indeed run both ways, irrespective of whether one thinks that the dynamic is unequal. Nevertheless, an inter-influence in both vocabulary and pronunciation occurs.


Yes, particularly historically, American English has been influenced by many other languages. And British English hasn't? No, indeed they're both influenced by other languages.


If we accept that one of the strengths of the English language is its ability to absorp other languages, than we'll also have to accept that one of the things it absorps is itself: dynamic interchange between dialects and pronunciations. Toe-MAY-toe, toe-MAH-toe. Forsooth.


Anecdotally, I have noticed many Californians using the British "shed-dule", rather than American "sked-dule". Although, I'm not sure we can compare California to the rest of the States anyway.


civilservant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Interesting that most of the terms quoted in your

> link are British slang rather than 'correct'

> usage, Saffron.

> Overall, I think that we are more influenced by

> them than they are by us and the impact is much

> more fundamental. I'm thinking of words like

> 'billion' - which is now accepted to mean a

> thousand million (originally US usage) rather than

> a million million (old UK usage)

>

> American English is influenced by much more than

> British usage, though - there is a lot of Italian,

> Spanish and Yiddish influence. I was told that

> their use of 'hopefully' is a literal translation

> from German usage. But many of their their

> strange spellings (losing the u in words such as

> "colour", for example) come from early attempts to

> rationalise English spelling, which succeeded in

> the States but failed to catch on here.

>

> Anyway, here's another of my pet hates -

> 'DISinterested' when one means 'UNinterested'.

> That's wrong both in the US and the UK!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I went to France recently and in the city I visited there were large billboards on the main streets urging people to stop their dogs from messing on the streets and in a little park a sign said something to the effect that this park was built for your enjoyment not as a dumping ground for dog mess. There were also big signs about not fly tipping. I wonder if councils are too worried about offending dog owners by making a fuss about this major problem. I was a dog owner for many years, got free bags from the council and there were even bins around then.
    • I was also woken by this. It happened in two bursts, which felt even more anti social.
    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...