LL-L "Idiomatica" 2007.10.02 (10) [E]

Tue Oct 2 19:51:01 UTC 2007

L O W L A N D S - L  -  02 October 2007 - Volume 10
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
=========================================================================

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Idiomatica" 2007.10.02 (01) [D/E]

> From:  "heatherrendall at tiscali.co.uk" <heatherrendall at tiscali.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Idiomatica" 2007.10.01 (10) [E]
>
> What do Lowlanders 'see' in their mind's eye when they hear " None of
> the men ... wearing hats ( or a hat). Do you see one man without a hat
> or several men without hats?

What do you mean by the ellipsis?

> 'None of the men were wearing hats/ a hat' seems much more logical
> visually speaking.

I'd say the semantics of living languages involves logic, common sense,
context and idiom, not just logic. A common way of making dialects or
minority languages seem inferior to language in the form in which it's
taught in schools is by trying to point out where dialects are less
logical, as if that matters.

Consider a line from Burns's song, "My Nannie's Awa":

"And listens the lambies that bleat ower the braes."

Logically this means that the lambs are listening, but in fact, taking
the context into account, it means that you can hear the lambs if you
listen.

Similarly "herken" (harken) in Scots can be used to mean either "listen
carefully" or "whisper".

There are other kinds of inverted logic in living language that are
clear because the "logical" meaning would make no sense, eg, "There you
go with your trousers all hanging out," or "If I could of Jove's nectar
sup, I would not trade for thine."

All sorts of ambiguity is also acceptable if the context makes it clear,
"Let's go and see the monkeys, they've got gorillas," or "You smell."

And with idiom logic tends to go right out the window: "Poor soul,"
"I'll teach you to steal my flowers," "I nearly split my sides
laughing," "It's a big if."

> What does BSL do, Sandy, to express the same idea?

"Everybody, hat none."

Though personally I'd be more likely to say, "All your hat are belong to
us!"  :)

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/

----------

From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Idiomatica" 2007.10.01 (10) [E]

From: R. F. Hahn < sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Idiomatica

Folks,

Tonight I was reminded of another idiomatic difference between American
English and non-American English.

"The children are pressurised to abandon their parents' language and
culture."

In American English this would be pressured.

Am I right in assuming that to American ears "pressurized" sounds like
literally put under pressure or receiving additional pressure, such as air
or gas pumped into them?

On the other hand, in non-American English you say "The house got burgled ,
and the burglar is still at large," while "to burgle" doesn't exist in
American English and you say "The house got burglarized, and the burglar is
still at large."

Another one: "Good night from all the team!"

In American this would be "Good night from the whole team!"

The way I see it, in American English a team or a similar body of people is
a singular unit, while in non-American English the members are the focus.
Similarly non-American "they" vs American "it" for nouns like "team" or
"government."

American English rarely uses "all the" in case of singulars, and then
perhaps only because of archaic idiomatic expressions. For example, you can
say "for all the world to see," but "for the whole world to see" sounds
right too.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron •
I get increasingly unsure about US/UK differences these days; we hear so
much American that it all tends to sound "right".

But I think we are possibly quicker to adapt as result of that.  For
example, successful US TV shows are simply shown here, and enjoy success
here too: "Friends", "Seinfeld", "NCIS" "The Simpsons" etc. need no
translation or explanation.  On the other hand, a successful British show
will be re-made in the US, with American actors: "The Office", "Cracker" are
a couple of examples.  American audiences apparently just aren't comfortable
with "foreigners" on the television.  The different accents and cultural
background would obviously be distraction from the plot or story.

There are probably deeper, political ramifications to that.  But I'm not
going there....

Paul Finlow-Bates

----------

From: "Ben J. Bloomgren" <ben.j.bloomgren at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Idiomatica" 2007.10.01 (10) [E]

Folks,

Tonight I was reminded of another idiomatic difference between American
English and non-American English.

"The children are pressurised to abandon their parents' language and
culture."

In American English this would be pressured.

Am I right in assuming that to American ears "pressurized" sounds like
literally put under pressure or receiving additional pressure, such as air
or gas pumped into them?

Ron, pressurized does sound weird in this context to me. I would use it to
refer to something like the pressurized air in an airplane's cabin or maybe
the pressurized climate of a politica election. I would say pressured here
because you're influencing them and giving them more incentive to move away
from their roots.

On the other hand, in non-American English you say "The house got burgled ,
and the burglar is still at large," while "to burgle" doesn't exist in
American English and you say "The house got burglarized, and the burglar is
still at large."

Burgle sounds like an imitation of something bubbling. Like a weird way to
say gurgle.

Another one: "Good night from all the team!"

In American this would be "Good night from the whole team!"

It's a little off but it'd work.

The way I see it, in American English a team or a similar body of people is
a singular unit, while in non-American English the members are the focus.
Similarly non-American "they" vs American "it" for nouns like "team" or
"government."

It is so strange to me to hear the announcers on BBC saying things like
"Arsenal want to do x or y". Hello? Are we talking about an arsenal of
weapons somewhere or about the soccer (not football!) team? It wouldn't
surprise me to know that we have multiple governments, but I'd like to think
we just have one!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071002/82a51b9e/attachment.htm>