[amitoj]

It seems we are not the only ones messing around with the Queen's language. They are not happy with Americanisms too
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14201796

[Thad E Ginathom]

That has been going on all my life --- and probably several generations longer.

Oddly, though, USA kept some older British usage, while it got changed in UK. A well-known instance is the -ize ending, considered to be an "Americanism." It seems that this was the original, and that the Brits changed to -ise.

What is damaging to the language, here, in USA, or in UK, is the this-sounds-clever spoutings of the marketing and management types. A certain American president, who, despite a prestigious education, seemed unable to speak the language was a good example. This leads to horrors like upgradation.

[vivekiny2k]

I guess over a period, we have successfully convinced youngsters (now well into their middle ages) that it's the idea that's important. language doesn't matter.

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by amitoj

It seems we are not the only ones messing around with the Queen's language. They are not happy with Americanisms too
BBC News - Americanisms: 50 of your most noted examples

Good link---thanks for posting it! I share the anguish expressed in those 50 examples.

But after working in Yankee companies for the past decade, I started using some of those words myself . Still nothing as ghastly as 'waiting on a train' !!

However one post reads as :

29. I'm a Brit living in New York. The one that always gets me is the American need to use the word bi-weekly when fortnightly would suffice just fine. Ami Grewal, New York

Actually bi-weekly and fortnightly are different . The former refers to 14 days, while the latter 15 days. The word used by Americans is 'semi-monthly' for fortnightly.

My favourite question to applicants for PeopleSoft positions is the differnce between bi-weekly and semi-monthly employees. The correct answer is that in case of the former, the amount paid per pay period is the annual compensation divided by 26, while in the latter it is divided by 24 pay periods.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

I guess over a period, we have successfully convinced youngsters (now well into their middle ages) that it's the idea that's important. language doesn't matter.

I'd call that a failure, personally. Those who understand the language better, and use it correctly (and English has quite a lot of flexibility built in, even for the pedantic) will always get that idea across better.

There are some things on that list of disliked Americanisms that I have never even heard!

One that I see regularly here is "I could care less." No, no, no, a thousand times no: you could not care less. It only takes a moment's reflection on what the words in the phrase actually say and mean to get this!

An "Americanism" I like: gotten. Another example of something the Brits discarded, but the Americans kept.

Waiting on a train is curious. I don't know if this is, just maybe, again, archaic usage. makes me think of Dickens, whose characters might (IIRC) look out window. Nobody can say that Dickens can't write, but a few decades later, that, obviously, would have attracted of the in the teacher's red pen.

Waiting on a train... Does it mean serving it dinner?

[vivekiny2k]

about the 'on'. This is what an american colleague said to me on a telephonic call when I failed to respond for a while (it was a late night call for a production problem).

"Oh Vivek you are still there, I thought you slept on me".

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Waiting on a train... Does it mean serving it dinner?

Har har, that is a good one, Thad!

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

"Oh Vivek you are still there, I thought you slept on me".

If it were a woman, I'd have said something like 'oooh I'd love to!'

[Thad E Ginathom]

Please revert to me ... one of the most ugly. I could, perhaps, revert to being a smoker, because I was one once, but I cannot revert to you!

Please help me fight this. If you do, I'll call you back

(or even get back to you, which I think is American, but at least it is not ugly.)

I don't have any problem with American usage of English... only with bad usage of English!

[atrisarkar]

I just got this mail from my broadband customer support team:

Dear Subscriber,

Hereby we are noticing that, Our EARTHLINK Customer Support will not availabe on 24.08.2011 from 04.00PM to 08:00PM due system up-gradation.

Please cooperate us for Improve our Service,
Thanks for Understanding,

Regards,
EARTHLINK Communications

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by atrisarkar

I just got this mail from my broadband customer support team:

Dear Subscriber,

Hereby we are noticing that, Our EARTHLINK Customer Support will not availabe on 24.08.2011 from 04.00PM to 08:00PM due system up-gradation.

Please cooperate us for Improve our Service,
Thanks for Understanding,

Regards,
EARTHLINK Communications

I think those guys have put in a disclaimer also - 'Thanks for Understanding'
What they meant was, 'Thank you for understanding the message in spite of our English'

[Technocrat]

The other day I saw posters for what looked liked an election campaign poster. It read

XYZ Councilman at Large

Is it correct usage? I thought "at large" was used for people who are absconding or something to that effect.

[Klub Class]

Dear English Gurus,

I came across a school ad which read as :

...upgraded to Class XII

I haven't come across such an usage! That said, the above line makes me wonder if the usage is correct or not!

[IronH4WK]

Originally Posted by Technocrat

The other day I saw posters for what looked liked an election campaign poster. It read

XYZ Councilman at Large

Is it correct usage? I thought "at large" was used for people who are absconding or something to that effect.

as in the killer is still at large? could be. at least that what i recall. couldn't find any other examples.

[Technocrat]

Originally Posted by IronH4WK

as in the killer is still at large? could be. at least that what i recall. couldn't find any other examples.

Yes, that where I have seen the most usage & that's why I am confused on the usage as I have mentioned before.

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by Technocrat

The other day I saw posters for what looked liked an election campaign poster. It read

XYZ Councilman at Large

Is it correct usage? I thought "at large" was used for people who are absconding or something to that effect.

Even I thought so. But Wikipedia gives the following definition

At-Large is a designation for representative members of a governing body who are elected or appointed to represent the whole membership of the body (for example, a city, state or province, nation, club or association), rather than a subset of that membership. At-large voting is in contrast to voting by electoral districts.
If an at-large election is called to choose a single candidate, a single-winner voting system must necessarily be used. If a group of seats must be covered, many electoral systems can be possible, from proportional representation methods (such as PR-STV) to block voting.

Source