All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Speak English Dammit

davorg on 2002-03-23T08:36:34

We like to josh our American cousins over the fact that they can't speak proper English, but actually I think that many of the most heinous crimes against the language take place on this side of the Atlantic.

Earlier this week a shop assistant apologised for giving me a handful of pound coins in my change because "I ain't got no fivers". I resisted pointing out that he was talking nonsense because a) life is too short and b) he was a lot bigger than me.

Here are some other common phrases that really grate when I hear them:

  • "Was" instead of "were" - "we was in the pub last night".
  • "Me" instead of "my" - "has anyone seen me pint"
  • "Of" instead of "have" - "you should of bought me a pint"

The only Americanisms that I can think of that come close to those are "gotten" and "math" (instead of "maths").

Americanisms

vek on 2002-03-23T12:33:32

And then there's also "anyways" instead of "anyway" - I hear that a lot.

Poor usage vs. dialect

lachoy on 2002-03-23T14:56:11

I'm curious: when is something poor usage and when is it dialect? I guess it can be both, but if something is part of a dialect then I tend to think of it in easier terms. (I think of a dialect as phrasing as well as pronunciation; I'm not sure if that's correct.)

For instance, in Western Pennsylvania, many people add an "at" to a location inquiry: "Where are you at?" (Or more often: "Where're you at?") "Where's the bookstore at?" Obviously this is redundant, but since it seems to me to be part of a dialect it doesn't irritate me. In fact, I find myself picking up the pattern when I talk to certain people. But that's the subject of an entirely different thread :-)

Re:Poor usage vs. dialect

vsergu on 2002-03-23T23:10:37

I don't think "where at" in that dialect is really redundant. It's just making a distinction that standard English doesn't anymore. It used to, by using "where" and "whither" for what that dialect expresses by "where ... at" and "where ... to". Then people started using "where" for "whither", which no doubt drove the pedants of the time up the wall. It's sort of like the use of "y'all" or "youse" or various other words to bring back the distinction that was lost when people started indiscriminately using "you" (instead of "thou") to refer to a single person.

I don't quite understand complaints about "of" in place of "have" in speech. I can see that people would find it annoying in writing, but I don't see how in speech you can tell for sure whether someone's saying "should of" or "should've".

Damn You!

james on 2002-03-23T20:08:56

I'll notice those more often now...

The first of the big two that really grate on me is 'choices''. No, not choices that isn't a word, the word you are looking for is options.

The other is the completely incorrect use of the word either. It means one or the other. It does not mean both. Of course this does provide genuine humour when reading engineering documents, for example: put the wings on either side of the plane. Which side? Left, or right? Please, do tell....

:-)

Re:Damn You!

pudge on 2002-03-24T00:31:16

Hm. First, Webster's notes that either may be more than just two options:

Scarce a palm of ground could be gotten by either of the three. --Bacon.


Additionally, that it might mean all options:

His flowing hair In curls on either cheek played. --Milton.


On either side ... was there the tree of life. --Rev. xxii. 2.


But, if you'd like to argue with Webster, Bacon, Milton, and GOD, be my guest. :-)

Re:Damn You!

james on 2002-03-25T14:46:13

Its not really that I'd care to argue, just that it leads to complete ambiguity.

Either meaning one or the other vs. either meaning both, and no real way to tell the difference. One definition contradicts the other.

Maybe I'm wrong in saying that its incorrect English, but it certainly isn't clear english :-)

Re:Damn You!

pudge on 2002-03-25T16:42:17

Context is usually clear enough to determine in which sense it is being used.

americanisms

gav on 2002-03-23T22:48:47

personally I think anyone who utters 'my bad' should be stoned to death on the spot :)

Ain't nothing wrong with that

pudge on 2002-03-24T00:34:40

I see nothing whatever wrong double negatives and tenses and cases and complete words or phrases. The problem is when these things are used in the wrong context. Frankly, if I am in a bar in Southie, I would find "we was here last night" to be much more reasonable than something like "yesterday eve, the lot of us were assembled at this establishment."

It's all context, I think. One might argue that a shop assistant should speak "more properly" because, in this context, he should be trying to present a professional appearance for his employer, but in another context, I don't necessarily see any problem with it.

I use "improper" English much the time (and "improper" Perl, too!), but when writing an article or paper or coding a module for my job or the CPAN, I'll use a more "proper" dialect.

not just the eastern side of the atlantic

wickline on 2002-03-25T12:43:05

I've heard every single example you gave on this side of the atlantic. The "me" instead of "my" example I've only heard at a Ren fair or in a play... but the others I hear in everyday conversation.

We yanks can butcher English at *least* as well as y'all! ;)

-matt

"of" as an auditory illusion

pemungkah on 2002-03-26T17:12:04

The use of "of" is actually not that at all; it's a sloppy abbreviation of "have".

"You should have said so" -> "You should've said so" -> (heard as) "You should of said so", due to local pronunciation.

In my current locality (MD, US), the "'ve" usually comes out as just "v", so "should've" sounds like "shoodv". In my birthplace (northern WV, US), it is sometimes pronounced "of", with a slight pause before the "of", the result sounding like the objectionable "shood uv". Cultural and economic factors apply, with the more advantaged leaning toward "v" and the less toward "of", with the spectrum centering on a "shooduv" with no pause.

So it's really what you hear more than what's said. This leads off into the evils of phonetic spelling and not teaching people how to speak their native language, and we probably don't want to go there.