Page 6 of 28

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:40 am
by benhall.1
Nanohedron wrote:
benhall.1 wrote:But undies, in the UK, covers a few different items of clothing - for instance, pants, bras, long johns, petticoats (maybe) etc.
Pretty much the same here. Pants (à la UK) first and foremost, with the rest as might apply.
Do you ever call such items of clothing "smalls"?

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:16 pm
by Nanohedron
benhall.1 wrote:
Nanohedron wrote:
benhall.1 wrote:But undies, in the UK, covers a few different items of clothing - for instance, pants, bras, long johns, petticoats (maybe) etc.
Pretty much the same here. Pants (à la UK) first and foremost, with the rest as might apply.
Do you ever call such items of clothing "smalls"?
I don't, but that's not to say that it's not used elsewhere in the States for undergarments; I haven't heard it myself, though. "Smalls" is one of those words that seem to have a variety of applications. There's a US TV show, American Pickers, where they use the word "smalls" for items that can easily be handled and carried without much fuss. There was a Chiffer a while back who said that in her part of Florida, a "small" was what I would call a "vanity", that cabinet-like feature around and under the bathroom sink. Where I live, "smalls" would probably normally refer to clothing size as a category, as opposed to Medium, Large, XL, etc.: "We need more Smalls in the shirt rack, so take care of that before lunch, would you?", or "Don't forget: Betty wears Mediums, and Josie wears Smalls."

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:46 pm
by ytliek
Here's a usage that has been popular around here, but, differs quite a bit from the familiar term. "Crop dusting" is usually understood in relation to farming and crops and that's my understanding, yet, in the northeast US somehow the urban dictionary version is in vogue and I hadn't realized it.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... %20dusting

I hadn't heard the urban version until a couple of years ago and had just left it at that, while I've noticed that the urban version crop dusting is fact more popular than I had thought... even used across age generations to my shocking puzzlement. Here, the term is very popular with the lactose intolerance crowd and luckily I do not suffer with that.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:04 pm
by Nanohedron
ytliek wrote:Here's a usage that has been popular around here, but, differs quite a bit from the familiar term. "Crop dusting" is usually understood in relation to farming and crops and that's my understanding, yet, in the northeast US somehow the urban dictionary version is in vogue and I hadn't realized it.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... %20dusting

I hadn't heard the urban version until a couple of years ago and had just left it at that, while I've noticed that the urban version crop dusting is fact more popular than I had thought... even used across age generations to my shocking puzzlement. Here, the term is very popular with the lactose intolerance crowd and luckily I do not suffer with that.
Early lore has it that "crop dusting" originally referred specifically to committing the offense in the fresh produce section of a grocery store, but that might have just been some bored wag overworking the concept. Besides, why should only veggies have all the fun?

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:13 pm
by ytliek
I've mentioned previously in my time chiffing that I've had a pretty sheltered life and missed out on a lot. :puppyeyes:

That might be why I prefer the open air farmer's market to grocery stores as much as possible.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:23 pm
by Nanohedron
ytliek wrote:I've mentioned previously in my time chiffing that I've had a pretty sheltered life and missed out on a lot. :puppyeyes:
Trust me, whatever you may have missed out on is probably highly overrated.
ytliek wrote:That might be why I prefer the open air farmer's market to grocery stores as much as possible.
A sensible strategy, but even fresh air will not be proof against some GI tracts. :twisted:

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2019 9:27 am
by walrii
Nanohedron wrote:Just a quick check on what may also be a regionalism: Do any Yanks outside of Minnesota use the word "spendy" at all?
Late to the party. My apologies.

I’ve heard it here in Wichita Falls, TX and use it myself on occasion. To be fair, the two gentlemen I heard it from are both Minnesotans who wisely traded a slow, freezing death during Minnesota winters to the off chance of a quick, thrilling death in a Texas tornado.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:04 pm
by Nanohedron
walrii wrote:To be fair, the two gentlemen I heard it from are both Minnesotans...
And there you go. Catchy word, though, isn't it. :)

I was reading a discussion from Portland, Oregon where some people strenuously objected to the use of "spendy" in their fair city - apparently they found the word déclassé and a threat to the very foundations of Western Civilization. They said "pricey" should be used instead, but failed to see that they had landed themselves in the very same boat.

C'mon. It's vernacular.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 1:49 am
by benhall.1
Nanohedron wrote:
walrii wrote:To be fair, the two gentlemen I heard it from are both Minnesotans...
And there you go. Catchy word, though, isn't it. :)

I was reading a discussion from Portland, Oregon where some people strenuously objected to the use of "spendy" in their fair city - apparently they found the word déclassé and a threat to the very foundations of Western Civilization. They said "pricey" should be used instead, but failed to see that they had landed themselves in the very same boat.

C'mon. It's vernacular.
I would have thought that "spendy" and "pricey" meant two radically different things. I took it that "spendy" was an adjective to describe someone who spends a lot; "pricey", at least for us, just means expensive. Have I got "spendy" wrong?

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 7:24 am
by walrii
benhall.1 wrote:
Nanohedron wrote:And there you go. Catchy word, though, isn't it. :)

I was reading a discussion from Portland, Oregon where some people strenuously objected to the use of "spendy" in their fair city - apparently they found the word déclassé and a threat to the very foundations of Western Civilization. They said "pricey" should be used instead, but failed to see that they had landed themselves in the very same boat.

C'mon. It's vernacular.
I would have thought that "spendy" and "pricey" meant two radically different things. I took it that "spendy" was an adjective to describe someone who spends a lot; "pricey", at least for us, just means expensive. Have I got "spendy" wrong?
Yep, you do. “Spendy” means, at least in its Texas translation, essentially the same as “pricey.”

Frank: “I took the missus to that new restaurant.”
Joe: “How was it?”
Frank: “Good food but a bit spendy for my wallet.”

I’m sure Nano will be along shortly to fill in the nuances.

Re Portland: That city apparently has an ironclad law guaranteeing every citizen the right not to be offended. California is falling way behind Oregon in the “silliest place on earth” race.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 1:09 pm
by ytliek
benhall.1 wrote:I would have thought that "spendy" and "pricey" meant two radically different things. I took it that "spendy" was an adjective to describe someone who spends a lot; "pricey", at least for us, just means expensive. Have I got "spendy" wrong?
Yes, I would agree with Ben's take on these terms. No, we don't use "spendy" hereabouts, at least I haven't heard it. Yes, "pricey" common here, or "high end" or "too rich" for that term.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 3:05 pm
by Nanohedron
walrii wrote:I’m sure Nano will be along shortly to fill in the nuances.
:lol:

Oh, dear - I've become predictable. Not being one to disappoint, here you go, then, and you're welcome:

No, Ben and ytliek; walrii's got it right. "Spendy" means expensive, as in you will have to spend a lot. His hypothetical exchange between Frank and Joe perfectly illustrates its use. Earlier on page 3, I offered my own: "Hey, check out that ski suit there. It'd be quite the item up at the cabin, don'tcha know." "I dunno ... looks kinda spendy." I was hoping that would do the job, but apparently the patois is too thick. :wink:

I don't have any slang terms for a spendthrift; if I wanted to keep it down to one word, I'd probably say "extravagant". Of course, context counts; one could use that in place of "spendy" or "pricey", too. In the unlikely event I called someone spendy, just as with "expensive" it would be understood in reference to their services commanding high bucks, or in being overpriced.

Understatement and irony are as Nordic as rye bread, so it also peppers everyday local speech, here; you might say of your shiny new car, "It gets the job done," while you're glowing about it. Confrontation offers good examples: it would be typical of the natives to say, "Maybe you could tone it down a bit," in place of "Please be quiet." Make no mistake, it's not necessarily the thinblooded supplication it sounds like in print; if you want to be ornery it can easily be delivered, and so understood, as a hard poke in the ribs no matter how "polite" the wording is; tone, body language and facial expression do the real talking. Telling a rowdy adult to be quiet is sticking your nose unasked into someone else's business, and that strains the social contract, so of course you lighten up the wording accordingly; but when done in full force, the understatement becomes a form of irony that, in this case, carries a sting. By contrast, change the wording to "Maybe you should tone it down a bit" (should, not could); if you're not negotiating, then it's a clear warning, and that can run from mild to even as far as meaning, "I'm an inch away from taking matters into my own hands, so wise up and chill out, buster - NOW." It's all in the delivery and context, but if you're paying attention it should be easy to catch. As you can see, high-context communication covers a lot of ground, but while it's very Minnesotan, neither is it universally so; the amount of Nordic influence (could be family, could be neighborhood) is what determines how likely you are to fall into talking around something. But it may go right over the heads of those who aren't used to it. Personally, I think it's a carryover from the time when every Viking and his dog walked around armed, and if your honor meant anything you were expected to stick up for yourself even if it came to blows, so it paid to be aware of what you were saying. I'll bet the first woman ever to say, "What, this old rag?" was a Swede. :lol:

I tend to think of "spendy" as an extension of that communication style.

On a side note, out-of-staters often lump us together as being a passive-aggressive bunch, and of course some are; you'll find that anywhere you go. But the more sweeping generalization mistakes style for substance; visitors either just can't keep up and don't realize it, or they find the style too foreign; either way, it's easier for them to make sense of it by simply pigeonholing it with a pathology, and dismiss it that way. It's too bad they can't see the broader view, but whatever gets you thru the night, I guess. For me, it's a playground. After all, since you're still going to know it for what it is, a threat is even tastier when it's veiled. Style, my friend. Style. :)

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:21 am
by benhall.1
Another thing has just come up. It's not really what I had in mind when I started this thread.

In an idle moment, I was playing "4 pics 1 word" on my phone. It's a pointless exercise, but very frustrating when it seems nearly impossible to get the word. The four pictures clearly represented something happening at the side of a kerb. But the eight letter word began with a 'C'. It took me ages to realise that there actually is a word - not in English, mind - that's spelt "curbside". I'd never come across that before. It doesn't make sense. What's it curbing? Sides?



[EDIT] Nearly forgot to mention: this is supposed to be the UK version of this game/app. There are quite a lot of other words that I don't recognise as well.

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 4:44 am
by david_h
benhall.1 wrote: I'd never come across that before. It doesn't make sense. What's it curbing?

'Curb' is in the Shorter OED, with enough, and varying, usage to indicate what 'curbing' might be. One meaning is "The stone margin of a side-walk. Usu. spelt kerb.1836". Unexpectedly, to me, 'side-walk' is also in the SOED, with a date of 1667, but the note "Now U.S. 1739"
benhall.1 wrote: Sides?
Nearside, offside, lakeside, (stateside maybe) ?

Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:04 am
by PB+J
I just posted this in its own thread, but the New York Times has a "british-Irish dialect quiz" that locates you geographically based on word choice:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... -quiz.html

I tried it, and it knew I was not from Ireland, England Scotland or Wales. But based on my answers it put me in southwest Ireland, which makes sense given that I grew up in an irish-american community. Probably a lot of americans would end up there, although I bet southern americans would end up somewhere else

A few years ago they did one for the US, and in my experience and the experience of everyone I knew who took it, it was extremely accurate