Language desk
< October 6	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 7[edit]

Recording session style guide?[edit]

For years I've been looking at lists of songs with recording information, and they seem to follow a fairly consistent style (even down to standard abbreviations for the instruments). But for the life of me I've never been able to find where this style is defined. Does anyone have any idea? Please note I'm interested in one for general writing rather than for Wikipedia.—Chowbok ☠ 00:57, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

American English vs. British English[edit]

Is there any way to find out whether British English or American English is the English of choice for those who speak English as a second language in countries in which English is not a primary language? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 02:00, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would depend on who's doing the teaching and/or who wrote the texts or other teaching materials. There'd be no one-size-fits-all answer to this.

And those two are not the only possibilities. If I were teaching English to people in Mongolia, say, I doubt it would be either British or American English as such. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 02:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there is a way to find out. What is the real question? Looie496 (talk) 02:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are there particular countries you're wondering about? Typically, European countries and countries that were part of the British Empire in the 20th Century speak British English, whereas countries in the Western Hemisphere and East Asia tend to speak American English. Of course, there's also Canadian English, Australian English, etc., which wouldn't really be considered either "British" or "American".—Chowbok ☠ 03:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether Europeans will learn "British English", but I do know that the US had a large presence in Germany over the past 60 years, and I know quite a few Germans who learnt English in that time and who speak it with an American accent. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:26, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Simply because of its population size, there will always be a lot of Indians learning English. In most cases they will learn Indian English. HiLo48 (talk) 04:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it has a lot to do with the type of English spoken by the teacher, moreso than the choice of the student. My French teacher in college was from France, and I sometimes have difficulty understanding Canadian French. → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 06:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By "speak" do we mean the choice of certain words (jumper vs sweater) or pronunciation? bamse (talk) 08:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...or spelling? HiLo48 (talk) 08:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Many non-native English users I've encountered exhibit a variety of influences in their spoken and written language, depending on whether, where and with whom they studied English formally, and their exposure to the language since. To complicate matters further, the majority of the world's EFL/ESL teachers are not native speakers of English.[1] so learners, particularly in non-Anglophone countries, may well be learning from someone whose own English usage isn't typical of one particular variety. - Ka renjc 10:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anecdotally, a pair of professors, one Russian born and the other Spanish, both said they began learning English with a British accent, which they found easier to pronounce and understand. Both switched to studying American English while in Europe due to the economic advantage. μηδείς (talk) 18:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One of the purposes of the British Council is to promote instruction of British English to foreign language learners... AnonMoos (talk) 18:53, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What a horrible thing. --Trovatore (talk) 19:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we Australians will just keep teaching them Australian English. That's not horrible. HiLo48 (talk) 19:36, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"DOES THE BRITISH COUNCIL TEACH BRITISH ENGLISH?

Most of our teachers are from the UK, so you will learn more about British accents and UK culture but English is an international language.

We teach practical English that can be used in any context in any country."

http://www.britishcouncil.org/korea-english-courses-adults-faqs.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.171.180 (talk) 20:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was teaching in Japan for ten years, and most schools preferred American English. I am British, and had no problem with that, but created my own school in my house, where I taught British English, and got lots of students because there appears to be some sort of prestige attached to British English. In Korea, they preferred American English, but it didn't really matter. In China, they preferred British English. Here in Hungary at my school, they teach British English. Some schools seem to have a preference based on the inability to understand that UK and US English are not as different as they think, whilst others does don't care, because English is English, and they have a business to run. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:38, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Anecdote:) When I was in school in Norway, we learnt British English, because that was the spelling used in our textbooks. However, due to how pervasive American pop-culture is (movies, TV-series, etc.), everyone spoke 'American' English, since that was what we were being exposed to. V85 (talk) 22:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Must have made you wonder why there was an extra "i" in aluminum/aluminium. StuRat (talk) 22:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Bing Translator, the Norwegian for "aluminium" is aluminium. It's aluminium in French too. You're rather out on a limb on that point I think. Alansplodge (talk) 23:27, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, because they would have heard it on American media, as they said, without the "i" pronounced (perhaps in the phrase "aluminum siding" while watching Tin Men). StuRat (talk) 00:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if you are trying to be cheeky StuRat, or if you don't understand what people are saying here. Since I, as a Swede, have the same experience as V85 I'm joining in. If we noticed it, we obviously found the lack of "i" in the American spelling and pronunciation odd, since it is there in virtually all other languages we would have been familiar with (as West/Northern Europeans). Personally, I noticed the American pronuncation of Al in the lyrics to E-Bow the Letter, and initially thought it was just a way to make the words match the rythm of the song. In my experience, the books used for teaching English during the first couple of years all used British English, as did all tapes etc. that came with them. There was never any ban or restriction on American English though, and as soon as we were able to read regular fiction books in addition to the textbooks, these could use any variety of the language./Coffeeshivers (talk) 16:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aluminum without the extra i was the choice of the discoverer, Humphry Davy, and it was a perfectly respectable choice, derived from alumina and similar to platinum and tantalum. It is unfortunate that most of the world picked up a usage proposed by some meddler who wrote in anonymously to a journal. This is one where we Yanks got it right. --Trovatore (talk) 19:32, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you attribute far too much power to that anonymous "meddler". All they [sic] did was to propose a new spelling. If the generality of people in the scientific community had thought it was a dumb idea, it would never have been heard of again. Interestingly, the word aluminum/ium does not appear in Humphry Davy except in a footnote. Humphry Davy does appear in aluminium, but as its namer, not its discoverer. The Etymology section is worth a read. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The truth is that relatively few people speak exclusively one variety of English all the time. Most of us who are exposed to other varieties tend to pick up bits and pieces, or more, of them. The pervasiveness of American media, and to a lesser extent British media, has wrought significant changes to other anglo-places. Case in point:

In Australia, we've always used the word alternative as both a noun and an adjective.

You say we have no alternative (n.) but to refuse him entry. The alternative (adj.) viewpoint is to let him in but to detain him for questioning.

The American version of that would be:

You say we have no alternative (n.) but to refuse him entry; the alternate (adj.) viewpoint is to let him in but to detain him for questioning.

We do have the word "alternate", but it was always exclusively used as a verb:

Your mood seems to alternate between gloomy and suicidal,

and it's pronounced differently (ALL-tuh-nayt) from the American adjective alternate (ALL-tuh-nuht). America also has this verb.

Well, lately, Australian reporters have been using alternate as an adjective where we have traditionally used alternative. Some say it in the American manner (ALL-tuh-nuht), but others have made up their own pronunciation, which exists in no known dialect (all-TER-nuht).

Another case:

We're stereotypically known for addressing men generally (and some women) as "mate". When I was growing up, if mate came at the end of a sentence, it had a certain stress. Sort of like:

"Is it gonna rain, MATE?" - "I wouldn't know, MATE". That overstates it, but you get the idea.

That all changed, and very quickly, when the TV show Minder first graced our screens in 1979. I am absolutely convinced that the Australian people picked up on that Cockney way of de-stresssing the last word, so that it's now usually:

"Is it gonna RAIN, mate?" - "I wouldn't KNOW, mate". -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 00:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine an American batting an eye at the use of alternative as an adjective. μηδείς (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But do they usually choose to use it that way? Not in my experience, but yours is obviously far wider. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 00:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably be more likely to use alternative, as in "an alternative method". But it would be "alternate juror", which is a set phrase. It would sound strange to hear, "You'll have to find an alternate route home." That would be "an alternative route". I just don't think there's any real difference, but each version might be used more in different contexts. μηδείς (talk) 15:51, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about this further, alternative implies some volition in the matter, while alternate usually doesn't. Divorced parents have the kids on alternate weekends. An alternate juror is a backup, not an alternative juror, as if there were some choice in the matter. If you have alternative routes you have various possible choices. If you take alternate routes that means you switch your routine according to some schedule, or are trying not to follow a predictable path because of fear of assassination. Alternate focuses on "(every) other" while alternative focuses on "option". μηδείς (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From a Canadian who uses some of both English and American styles: I've had to teach myself not to bat an eye at what I consider to be insalubrious language use. I was causing hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and giving myself eyestrain and whiplash. Bielle (talk) 01:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, Hurricane Bielle, eh. Is your last syllable pronounced like -cane, or -kən? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

How about "ell"? Bielle (talk) 01:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

WP:VNE (version of 12:15, 5 October 2012) says the following in point 4.

Use a commonly understood word or phrase in preference to one that has a different meaning because of national differences (rather than alternate, use alternative or alternating depending on which sense is intended).

—Wavelength (talk) 02:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is not necessary for schools to have a preference for US or UK English. Most of the kids are only learning it so they can pass exams, which are mostly written exams, so they only need to know the spelling. Even then, they are multiple choice anyway, so they don't even need to know that. Also, businesspeople will be interacting with people all over the world, and not just people from the US or the UK, all with varying levels of English and various types of accents, so it really doesn't matter. I met a girl in China who was really proud of her strong Georgia accent, and after a few days on a sort of business trip with her, she refused to talk to me, because she thought my UK accent was affecting hers. I told her, "It doesn't matter: language is for communication, not for sounding like you are from a place you have never even been to." If a Hungarian comes up to me and says "Áj vil nat báj zisz rekord, it iz szkrecsd," I will understand him. Seriously, it doesn't matter. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:26, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And your surroundings matter a lot...I learnt most of my English in Ireland (Kerry), and am living in Brussels now...so my English at the moment is a bit of Irish/Dutch accent mix, which kind of flummoxes people from the United States. Are others picking up accents like that too, and change it accordingly when they are amongst others who speak English with an accent? Lectonar (talk) 08:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is very common for people to change their accents depending on who they are talking to. Sometimes this is deliberate; I have been in a call-centre in the North of England where people are told to tone down their regional accents. Other times it is just hearing accents around. My wife is from Texas and living in England usually speaks with a very mild accent - some people literally cannot understand her otherwise. As soon as she gets on a phone to someone from Texas she brings on a much stronger accent, and says she doesn't realise it. -- Q Chris (talk) 08:52, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this is termed Style-shifting. -- Q Chris (talk) 09:07, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. From travelling around a lot, I have basically lost my Liverpool accent, and I speak a mixture of US/UK English (as in, I have a standard RP accent, but it's very often rhotic, and my 'u' and 'a' vowels are still Northern), but when I return to Liverpool, the accent comes back again almost immediately, except when I am on the phone. If I use a Scouse accent abroad, I am very unlikely to be understood by anyone, and if I use the accent while I am on the phone trying to conduct business.... well, you know what I mean. However, from time to time, depending on who I am with, even in Liverpool I will drop the Scouse accent and return to my international one, to which many people remark, "Where are you from?" As an aside, there are some enclaves in the US where UK English is spoken, but with a really old Cockney style. In one film with Clint Eastwood in it, he ends up in some rural village out in the styx, and he needs to go somewhere, so he goes up to this guy and asks where the bus stops. The guy says "Right 'ere", and Clint looks around sheepishly and asks, "Where is that?", and the guy points at the ground and says "Right 'ere!!". KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:32, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain exactly what you mean by your "a" vowel being Northern? (I get all the rest.) PS, the US accent you describe would be called hillbilly. μηδείς (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Northern English and Trap–bath split. KägeTorä is saying they pronounce words like "bath and "path" with the same vowel sound as "trap"; a native of Southern England would pronounce them with the same vowel sound as "palm" and "father". Gandalf61 (talk) 16:22, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"They", really? I can somewhat reluctantly accept the "singular they" in generic uses ("everybody get their coat!") but it's seriously jarring when referred to a named individual, even if you don't happen to know that person's sex. --Trovatore (talk) 19:21, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are cases where I have good evidence about a person's sex but I use singular they in relation to them in order to respect their wish that people not assume or attribute to them any particular sex, or anything else about their personal identity. Well, one case, anyway. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To me it comes across as seriously inferior. If it's absolutely necessary to use a sex-neutral term for a named interlocutor, then he or she or this person or other workarounds. --Trovatore (talk) 19:38, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think Gandalf was referring to the pronunciation of people from the North in general, and not just mine. Hence, 'they'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 20:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. You might be right. I hadn't considered that. --Trovatore (talk) 20:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, Trovatore - you were right the first time. Not being aware of his or her sex, I informally used the pronoun "they" to refer to KägeTorä. I should, of course, have been more formal and called her or him "he or she". I hope she or he was not upset by my informality, and I apologise if I caused him or her any embarrassment or offended her or his sensibilities in any way. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:23, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really informality. "Singular they" when the referent is "someone" or "anyone" has a long history. Singular they, when you have a particular person in mind, not so much, and it sounds like self-conscious PC. --Trovatore (talk) 08:27, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trovatore - it was most kind of you to explain your point again but there was really no need. In my last post I was using a rhetorical device that we call "irony" in British Englsih. I don't know whether you have a word for that in American English. Sorry if I caused confusion. Gandalf61 (talk) 09:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, Gandalf. Just to clear this up, and to avoid future cross-pond warfare, I shall explain that I am a man, and 'he' is fine for me. If you would prefer to say 'they' (which I actually find very polite, rather than condescending), I shall have to get all of my multiple personalities to vote so we can have a general ~~concensus~~ consensus on which sounds better to us. It may take some time, however, because after all, here on Wikipedia, we are anonymous, and we are legion. :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:39, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I always thought we were few...Lectonar (talk) 11:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But the number of long-time Wikipedians, who by rights should know more about consensus than anyone, but who still can't spell it, is legion. :)

A good aide-memoire is that it's cognate with "consent", and has nothing to do with counting heads in a census. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 12:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Could it be the pronounciation which makes it so easy to confound? Or just selective perception Lectonar (talk) 12:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Jack. I wondered what that dotted red line was doing under it after I typed it. :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:28, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice meeting you or what?[edit]

If you get introduced to someone it's normal to say "nice meeting you". But what do you say if you get introduced, spend a couple of hours talking to someone and then it's time to say goodbye? You'll be not immediately after the introduction, so would you say "It was nice to have met you"? OsmanRF34 (talk) 23:34, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Best to leave that vapid expression well alone and say something else (anything that includes "nice" is automatically vapid). How about "Hello", "Good morning", or "Pleased to meet you" when you get introduced, and "It was a pleasure meeting you" when you depart. At least you're talking about your experience ("pleasure") and your supposed feelings ("pleased"). "Nice" says nothing. Less than nothing. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Nice" may be overused, but it's not meaningless. See def 7 here (due to many obsolete and rare defs listed first): wikt:nice. (And shall I point out that I provided a link, while you did not ?) StuRat (talk) 00:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I never said "nice" was meaningless, I said it says less than nothing. Your new contribution is welcomed, by me at least. (Your rhetoric, on the other hand ...) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 00:46, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My English teacher at school always told us never to use the word 'nice', because he said it comes from Latin 'nescio', which means "I don't know". It doesn't matter where it comes from, it's what it means now that is important. If my mate buys a Ferrari and shows it to me, and then I say "Nice", it doesn't mean "I don't know." because that would be gibberish, or as Etymonline says "foolish, stupid, senseless," which would be an insult. It just means I do not want to overly commit myself with adjectives that show my true feelings (which may range from a real pleasure to downright disgust). 'Paradise' comes from an Indo-European word 'para-daiza', meaning 'something which is superbly constructed'. It doesn't matter if I go to some tropical island in the Pacific and call it 'paradise', whether it was or wasn't superbly constructed by human hands. Usage of words depends on current usage, not etymology. Also, 'nice' may be overused, but so is the verb 'to be', in that case. Both the verb 'to be' and the word 'nice' perform specific functions in the language. 'Nice' is a non-committal word which is in polite usage. "Nice meeting you" is fine. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was a pleasure getting to know you. μηδείς (talk) 00:31, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I really enjoyed speaking with you. Bielle (talk) 01:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although grammatically correct "It was nice to have met you" sounds somewhat unnatural to me. I would say "It was nice to meet you" or even "It was nice meeting you". I don't seem to share the prejudice against nice for use in casual conversation that the other contributors do, although I would avoid it in written communication.TheMathemagician (talk) 11:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OP, may I ask - are you a native English speaker, and if so, which variety? I ask because I (Northern UK English speaker) would never say "Nice meeting you" to someone one being introduced to them: I would say "Nice/Good/Pleased to meet you", with an implicit It is ... or I am ... at the beginning. I might very well say: "Nice meeting you" on parting, where it would be shorthand for "It was nice meeting you." All stock phrases risk sounding insincere in this kind of situation, though. It's true that, leaving aside etymology, nice is an overused adjective that often sounds anodyne even when genuinely meant and can easily damn with faint praise. Medeis and Bielle's suggestions inject a little more warmth and sincerity by departing from the usual platitude. - Ka renjc 15:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To me it was nice to have met you carries a possible implication that it was formerly nice, but now no longer is, or at least I decline to assert that it remains nice. I would avoid it for that reason. It was nice meeting you, for some reason, does not trigger this nuance; I am not quite sure why. Possibly "meeting you" is a particular event in the past, and so naturally I can only say that it was nice (you wouldn't ordinarily say it is still nice meeting you), but "to have met you" is a continuing state, and if I say that that "was" nice, I invite the question whether it remains nice. --Trovatore (talk) 01:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the bigger issue is not in the specific formulation one chooses when meeting someone or whatever, it is all of the other stuff that goes along with the words: your intonation, your body language, the entire context of the speaking is important. Any salutation can sound insincere if its delivery is wrong, and a warmly and sincerely delivered greeting is far more likely to be received favorably regardless of the specific idiom or word choice used to deliver it. It's all in how you say it, and not necessarily in what you say. --Jayron32 19:39, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I go along with that 100%. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:52, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I have been thinking for the whole thread. There's nothing wrong with a bland formulaic pleasantry sincerely delivered. μηδείς (talk) 05:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience (I've lived all over the UK, but probably picked up this habit in Glasgow), when leaving someone, it is normal to have a "forwards-looking" statement anticipating our next encounter. So I would say something like "Hope to see you again soon". Bluap (talk) 00:02, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add a warning that, like most things in UK English, it depends a lot on your relative social status. My response would be OK when talking to someone of roughly the same status (maybe 2 statuses lower or 1 status higher). Higher to lower status, saying "Pleased to have met you" is fine. Lower to higher status, I'm not sure - possibly wait for the higher-status person to make their reply. Bluap (talk) 00:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Nice to see you, nice". Astronaut (talk) 19:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]