anglicism/gallicism

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » anglicism/gallicism

Page 3 of 6 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

anglicism/gallicism

Author

Message

Des Small

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 6:58 am

Guest

John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> writes:

[quote:a83f2da824]**Everything** in English is a consequence of occupation by a
foreign force, except a very few suspected pre-Celtic words and the
legion of voluntarily-adopted borrowings!
[/quote:a83f2da824]
Hwæt? If you're pegging the Angles and Saxons and Jutes (oh my!) as
invaders, we look forward very much to your theory explaining how
Blighty was the cradle of humanity, in opposition to the more popular
"out of Africa" theory.

Des
is as autochthonique as it gets, which is not at all

the Omrud

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 7:05 am

Guest

Robert Lieblich spake thusly:

[quote:d43b30716f]Pierre Renault wrote:

I've not bothered to page through the other replies, its fairly obvious I'm
not going to follow the same tact.

With respect, that last word should be "tack." See

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20000505
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.txt
(search for "TAKE A DIFFERENT TACT")
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=540&x_context=4
(search for "tack/tact")

Even M-W, which is about as leniently descriptive a dictionary as
you can find, lists no definition for "tact" that corresponds to
your usage.

As I think most AUE-ers will agree, this usage is much like "You've
got another thing coming" -- It sounds just fine until you start to
think about it.
[/quote:d43b30716f]
Except for the sailors amongst us, to whom it never sounded fine in
the first place.

--
David
=====
replace usenet with the

Lanarcam

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 7:08 am

Guest

Des Small wrote:
[quote:a5660f23b7]John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> writes:

**Everything** in English is a consequence of occupation by a
foreign force, except a very few suspected pre-Celtic words and the
legion of voluntarily-adopted borrowings!

Hwæt? If you're pegging the Angles and Saxons and Jutes (oh my!) as
invaders,
[/quote:a5660f23b7]
No, they were tourists, annoyed by dumb backward locals;)

[quote:a5660f23b7]we look forward very much to your theory explaining how
Blighty was the cradle of humanity, in opposition to the more popular
"out of Africa" theory.
[/quote:a5660f23b7]
Popular theory today, unpopular pratice yesterday;)

Mike Lyle

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 7:15 am

Guest

the Omrud wrote:
[quote:40a9377635]Robert Lieblich spake thusly:

Pierre Renault wrote:

I've not bothered to page through the other replies, its fairly
obvious I'm not going to follow the same tact.

With respect, that last word should be "tack." See

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20000505
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.txt
(search for "TAKE A DIFFERENT TACT")
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=540&x_context=4
(search for "tack/tact")

Even M-W, which is about as leniently descriptive a dictionary as
you can find, lists no definition for "tact" that corresponds to
your usage.

As I think most AUE-ers will agree, this usage is much like
"You've
got another thing coming" -- It sounds just fine until you start
to
think about it.

Except for the sailors amongst us, to whom it never sounded fine in
the first place.
[/quote:40a9377635]
Took one aback, didn't it?

--
Mike.

John Woodgate

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 7:56 am

Guest

I read in sci.lang.translation that Des Small <des.small@bristol.ac.uk>
wrote (in <yyrjhdhf42hd.fsf@pc156.maths.bris.ac.uk>) about
'anglicism/gallicism', on Sat, 7 May 2005:
[quote:0797301710]John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> writes:

**Everything** in English is a consequence of occupation by a
foreign force, except a very few suspected pre-Celtic words and the
legion of voluntarily-adopted borrowings!

Hwæt? If you're pegging the Angles and Saxons and Jutes (oh my!) as
invaders, we look forward very much to your theory explaining how
Blighty was the cradle of humanity, in opposition to the more popular
"out of Africa" theory.

Those are mere recent immigrants. AFAIK, the people who were here before[/quote:0797301710]
the first wave of Celts were Picts. Of course, archaeological evidence
of human occupation goes back more than 250 000 years, but that's quite
recent enough for modern-type humans to have walked from Africa.

So we have as post-Pictish invaders, Celts (p- and q-), Romans, ASJs,
Vikings and Normans.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

Bob Cunningham

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 8:43 am

Guest

On Sat, 07 May 2005 08:15:18 -0400, Robert Lieblich
<Robert.Lieblich@Verizon.net> said:

[quote:f90ce00e75]Pierre Renault wrote:

I've not bothered to page through the other replies, its fairly obvious I'm
not going to follow the same tact.

With respect, that last word should be "tack." See

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20000505
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.txt
(search for "TAKE A DIFFERENT TACT")
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=540&x_context=4
(search for "tack/tact")

Even M-W, which is about as leniently descriptive a dictionary as
you can find, lists no definition for "tact" that corresponds to
your usage.

As I think most AUE-ers will agree, this usage is much like "You've
got another thing coming" --
[/quote:f90ce00e75]
And "duck tape" for "duct tape".

I've also heard "track house" for "tract house".

[quote:f90ce00e75]It sounds just fine until you start to think about it.
[/quote:f90ce00e75]
As is the case with "I could care less".

> [ ... ]

Kevin O'D.

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 9:09 am

Guest

Years ago I had a somewhat dotty acquaintance who was organising a movement
called: CELTIC REVANCHE. He produced a brochure that included slogans such
as "Britain for the Celts!" "The Anglo-Saxon Experiment Has Failed!" "Scots,
Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx UNITE!"

Coemgenus

"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
news:4ELaZKSdkMfCFwNL@jmwa.demon.co.uk...
[quote:f452fab3be]I read in sci.lang.translation that Des Small <des.small@bristol.ac.uk
wrote (in <yyrjhdhf42hd.fsf@pc156.maths.bris.ac.uk>) about
'anglicism/gallicism', on Sat, 7 May 2005:
John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> writes:

**Everything** in English is a consequence of occupation by a
foreign force, except a very few suspected pre-Celtic words and the
legion of voluntarily-adopted borrowings!

Hwæt? If you're pegging the Angles and Saxons and Jutes (oh my!) as
invaders, we look forward very much to your theory explaining how
Blighty was the cradle of humanity, in opposition to the more popular
"out of Africa" theory.

Those are mere recent immigrants. AFAIK, the people who were here before
the first wave of Celts were Picts. Of course, archaeological evidence of
human occupation goes back more than 250 000 years, but that's quite
recent enough for modern-type humans to have walked from Africa.

So we have as post-Pictish invaders, Celts (p- and q-), Romans, ASJs,
Vikings and Normans.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk[/quote:f452fab3be]

retrosorter

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 10:03 am

Guest

Oh yeah? what do you call these 20th century additions to our lexicon?

courgette/roquette/nouvelle
cuisine/hangar/limousine/chassis/engagé/lacquer/curie/leotard/chauffeur/frappé/cointreau/haute
cuisine/aileron/auteur/camouflage/maitre d/detente/cinema/cinema
verité/chassis/maisonette/fuselage/hangar/coquillles st
jacques/cassoulet/crudité/coq au vin........ to name but a few.

Also, in Quebec English, we use terms such as dépanneur (convenience
store) permanence instead of tenure and sometimes syndicat instead of
union without batting an eyelash or worrying whether this is "proper
English."

retrosorter

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 11:02 am

Guest

Words created such as "courriel" instead of "email" are creative uses
of language and I hope they catch on. Similarly, I prefer the term
"logiciel" to "software" and I hope it endures. But one can not dictate
language usage and must realize that it is essentially a democratic
process dictated by common usage. Langauges are not "pure"; they sleep
around with whomever they find most attractive. It is unreasonable to
expect someone to say something like "envoyer par télécopieur" when
they can save their breath or their fingers by using "'faxer" instead.
Some of the anglicisms people complain about are just plain silly. At
the Gomery Inquiry , Judge John Gomery was criticized for using the
anglicism "item" notwithstanding that mant literate francophones use
the word. What''s wrong if a word such as "item" is absprbed into the
French language?

Peter T. Daniels

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 11:26 am

Guest

Bob Cunningham wrote:

[quote:a70246d33f]And "duck tape" for "duct tape".
[/quote:a70246d33f]
Did you sleep through all of last week, when it emerged that "duck tape"
is earlier than "duct tape" and was probably recoined as a trademark
subsequently?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net

Peter T. Daniels

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 11:30 am

Guest

Pierre Renault wrote:

[quote:eefe247921]Mandarin (written Chinese, in other words) borrows very, very little from
other languages (I'm told there are only two word-concepts that had to be
borrowed, "boycott" is one).
[/quote:eefe247921]
What's a "word-concept," and who "told" you that lie?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net

Peter T. Daniels

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 11:33 am

Guest

Des Small wrote:
[quote:24f347c64f]
John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> writes:

**Everything** in English is a consequence of occupation by a
foreign force, except a very few suspected pre-Celtic words and the
legion of voluntarily-adopted borrowings!

Hwæt? If you're pegging the Angles and Saxons and Jutes (oh my!) as
invaders, we look forward very much to your theory explaining how
Blighty was the cradle of humanity, in opposition to the more popular
"out of Africa" theory.

Des
is as autochthonique as it gets, which is not at all
[/quote:24f347c64f]
David Crystal (*Stories of English*) indicates the Jutes don't seem to
have been a people at all, but it seems to be a sort of cover term for
"miscellaneous."
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net

Raymond S. Wise

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 12:03 pm

Guest

retrosorter wrote:
[quote:1c3ce6345c]Oh yeah? what do you call these 20th century additions to our
lexicon?

courgette/roquette/nouvelle

cuisine/hangar/limousine/chassis/engagé/lacquer/curie/leotard/chauffeur/frappé/cointreau/haute
cuisine/aileron/auteur/camouflage/maitre d/detente/cinema/cinema
verité/chassis/maisonette/fuselage/hangar/coquillles st
jacques/cassoulet/crudité/coq au vin........ to name but a
few.[/quote:1c3ce6345c]

There's also "poutine" (which, among other things, is now an entry in
The *Encarta World English Dictionary,* North American edition). I've
mentioned it before as a word having gone from English into French and
then back into English, the original term supposedly being "pudding,"
but that etymology has been called into question, according to the
author of the Wikipedia article on "poutine."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutine

[quote]

The exact origin of the word itself is unknown, but linguists believe
it came from one of the many French patois that influenced early Quebec
French, as many of those have similar words: _poutingo_ means "bad
stew" in Provençal, _poutringo_ is a "mix of different things" in
Langue d'Oc, etc. Many used to think it comes from the English word
_pudding,_ which is unlikely although the different meanings of
_poutine_ may have been influenced by this word.

[end quote]

[quote:1c3ce6345c]

Also, in Quebec English, we use terms such as dépanneur
(convenience
store) permanence instead of tenure and sometimes syndicat instead of
union without batting an eyelash or worrying whether this is "proper
English."
[/quote:1c3ce6345c]

--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA

E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com

Donna Richoux

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 12:10 pm

Guest

Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

[quote:e5c37446b4]Bob Cunningham wrote:

And "duck tape" for "duct tape".

Did you sleep through all of last week, when it emerged that "duck tape"
is earlier than "duct tape" and was probably recoined as a trademark
subsequently?
[/quote:e5c37446b4]
First, you seemed to miss a fine point or two. "Duck tape" was earlier
only in the sense that the early phrase named a different product, a
cloth tape without glue. What evidence is available shows the adhesive
sort was called "duct tape" slightly before "duck tape," but that
evidence is sketchy.

Second, you and Bob C. would be well advised to ignore each other's
posts because you both lose your tempers and the rest of us are weary of
seeing that happen. I hope he doesn't rise to your bait.

--

Uneasily -- Donna Richoux

Peter T. Daniels

Posted: Sat May 07, 2005 12:25 pm

Guest

Donna Richoux wrote:
[quote:c29b378467]
Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

Bob Cunningham wrote:

And "duck tape" for "duct tape".

Did you sleep through all of last week, when it emerged that "duck tape"
is earlier than "duct tape" and was probably recoined as a trademark
subsequently?

First, you seemed to miss a fine point or two. "Duck tape" was earlier
only in the sense that the early phrase named a different product, a
cloth tape without glue. What evidence is available shows the adhesive
sort was called "duct tape" slightly before "duck tape," but that
evidence is sketchy.

Second, you and Bob C. would be well advised to ignore each other's
posts because you both lose your tempers and the rest of us are weary of
seeing that happen. I hope he doesn't rise to your bait.
[/quote:c29b378467]
Then why does he keep posting his maunderings to sci.lang?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net

Page 3 of 6 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:51 am Science Forum Index