Talk:List of words with different meanings in British and American English

message: This is my attempt at overhauling the article to be tidier and hopefully more maintainable.  At the moment I have done only the A-F section.
I have used the notation [?] where I feel things might want checking/improving, and also dotted a few HTML comments here and there, but feel free to improve any entries.
A few open issues remain:
*what to do with the old instances of "(+US meaning as an Americanism)"
*what to do with meanings that are rare or dialectal on one side
*what notation should fill blank cells - ideally this shouldn't be misleading when the US meaning overlaps the UK one or vice versa (as with bathroom).
-- Smjg 16:25, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

message: The more general meaning has moved from the British column to the common one.
Here's how I as a Brit understand the terms.  "Brackets" by itself means ( ).  Other sorts [ ] { } < > might be considered as kinds of brackets, but they're practically always qualified (square brackets, curly brackets, angle brackets).  So far, so good.
However, does any American use "brackets" by itself to mean ( )?  Or does it always mean [ ]? -- Smjg 15:41, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brackets 

message: I think this article should be merged with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_English_words_not_used_in_American_English and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_English_words_not_used_in_British_English. I really don't see the point of having three separate lists. That's my view anyway.
: Disagree.  Cluttering it up with words that only exist in one dialect would reduce its usefulness. -- Smjg 16:11, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Articles? 

message: I am wondering whether it's necessary to have a column here for "Meanings common to AmE and BrE". This isn't meant to be a dictionary, it's meant to be a list of DIFFERENT meanings. Wouldn't it be easier to just have two columns: one for BrE meanings which are not used in AmE, and the other for AmE meanings which are not used in BrE? (Either of these columns could, of course be blank.) This is like the old version... it was just that the column headings in the old version were confusing and needed to be clarified.
:No, because it is also useful to know which meanings are used in both versions of English. -- Necrothesp 11:13, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But, if this information wasn't listed then it might be thought that it hadn't been confirmed one way or the other whether these were AmE or BrE. This is a dynamic list, it's being added to all the time. If you just missed out meanings common to both countries then it would be confusing and incomplete. To use your example, if the definition of "ace" as a one in a suit of playing cards wasn't included as common to both countries then I, as a British English speaker, might think that Americans didn't use the term, but nobody had yet thought to include it as a definition peculiar to British English (as frequently happens). In actual fact, somebody did try to do as you suggest and remove all definitions common to both countries a while ago. It was desperately unpopular, the person who did it was heavily criticised, and most of them have since been reinstated. So I think the suggestion is a non-starter. -- Necrothesp 17:03, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

text: You misunderstand me. The confusion does not stem from a lack of explanation in the blurb. It would be implicit if these definitions were removed. The article would be useless as a reference tool. -- Necrothesp 18:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes we do.  Listing only those meanings that are different would destroy both usefulness and maintainability.  Please read the motive behind this whole rewrite. -- Smjg 16:11, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we need four columns? 

message: I suppose the idea of using asterisks to denote 'mainly used here' is OK, or will be once we all get used to it.
But I'm not sure I like the decision to add the headwords from the live version before the definitions are put in.  I don't see that much time has been saved by doing this, especially considering:
* when we get round to putting the definitions in, we'll have to merge in the additions from the live version anyway
* I personally find it easiest to copy and paste the whole section from the live version and then tweak it to the new format.
Moreover, which word should "to be on the telephone" really be filed under?  Do we have a consensus?
-- Smjg 17:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes by [[User:JackLumber|JackLumber]] 

message: # Prefix "to" on verbs.  I'd say no:
#* It looks rather a mess, especially with the number of words that can be more than one part of speech.
#* You don't see headwords like "to advocate" in a dictionary.
#* This is a list of words having different meanings in British and American English.  "To slate" is not a word.  OK, so we list some phrases as well, but the average verb means the same whether the word immediately before it is "to" or not.
#* It would be arbitrary and inconsistent to single out verbs for labelling in this way.  If we do, we ought to prefix countable nouns with "a" or "an" to match, and just as well, and as for other PsOS...?
#* For those words where we do single out one POS to talk about, we have the (noun), (verb), etc. notation, which is much more transferrable.
# "U.S." or "US".  It seems weird that this is being changed back and forth, but nobody seems to be engaging in a similar fight between "UK" and "U.K.".  Of course, with the page being about dialectal differences, we can't expect it to be all in one dialect, but we ought to be able to achieve some level of agreement.  I prefer consistency....
-- Smjg 14:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few things we can't seem to agree on 

message: I was trying to keep the mess that UK-US heterologues A-Z is at the moment out of this rewrite.  Ewlyahoocom, did you actually read my reasons for objecting to the merge? -- Smjg 11:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry! I was disambiguating some links. I got interested in the merge proposal but thought it had stalled at Talk:List_of_words_having_different_meanings_in_British_and_American_English#The_merge_proposal -- I'm not even sure how I wound up on this rewrite page. Looking at the histories I see that changes are continuing to be made over at UK-US heterologues A-Z; perhaps the folks over there are unaware that their page will soon be replaced? Again, let me apologise. Keep up the good work! Ewlyahoocom 13:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: UK-US heterologues A-Z is currently a mess and always will be. Taxonomical categorization of Englishes is never where. (Incidentally, the word "heterologue" is not in the OED nor in W3.) (W3 being "Webster's Third" and not "WWW".) More often than not, the difference between British and American variants of English is a matter of usage, that is, aside from a few well-defined instances (e.g. petrol/gasoline) there is no "British Heterologue" or "American Heterologue" or anything like that---take arugula, for example; as an American, I might as well say garden rocket or just rocket. British and American usages often overlap and the distinction is blurry, or at least not so clear to be displayed on such a grid. An effective, thorough way to catch the real essence of British vs. American would be reporting differences in usage. Minimal pairs like (track, line), (movie, film), (figure out, work out), (corporation, company) are good examples---the word that comes first in each of these pairs sounds somewhat more "American," the second, somewhat more "British." But this means little to lexicographers, as both words are actually standard in both Englishes. Is "dirt" (as in "loose earth") American English? Yes, because it's chiefly found in North America. And no, because it's precolonial English usage that some British speakers did retain (although most of them dropped it.) Is "rubbish" British English? The word "rubbish" was written in my lease (along with garbage, trash, refuse, and waste!) Did my ex-landlord want to sound "british"? Rubbish. (Technically, "rubbish" means something akin to "trash", i.e. packing, paper, metal junk etc.,  "garbage" being food waste). The use of asterisks on this page is, in my opinion, necessary to adequately outline (was that a split infinitive?) this often hazy borderline --JackLumber 13:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why has the merge proposal appeared here? 

message: This entry certainly could do with a bit of cleaning up.  Firstly, "not irregular" is a rather poor definition.  Secondly, fast food chains over here often call one of their sizes "regular", though which size varies - McDonald's uses it to mean "small", KFC uses it to mean "medium".  Thirdly, COED, CALD and CDAE certainly imply that some of the so-listed British meanings are American as well.
I'll have a go at fixing it - please check. -- Smjg 11:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I have never looked at it from upclose before, but it's actually unsightly. Heritage of the old page... --JackLumber 11:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regular 

message: Thin, hard, unsweetened biscuit is probably the most common UK meaning
See , , , etc.
:OK, wise cracker. Roger. Historical note added. Over and out.--JackLumber 21:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cracker in the UK 

message: The British version of "tap" is commonly used in the U.S. in the context of beer -- to "tap a keg", a "beer tap", etc.  Less common (or non-existant -- I am polluted in this sense by a Brit spouse) in the sense of "faucet". -- Gnetwerker 06:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "tap" is mostly used when speaking of casks and the like; maybe we should add this meaning in the 2nd column, with possibly the indication of spigot as U.S. synonym, spigot not being used in BrE AFAIK. "Tap" meaning "faucet" is regarded as *'ed British, as it occasionally shows up on this side of the pond, e.g. in the phrase "tap water." While we're at it, the "tap" is also the sound of the t's & d's in latter, ladder, party, everybody that is etc.--JackLumber 12:32, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tap

message: I think putting "tea" (the hot beverage) in the British column is a vile calumny against Americans (also not true).  "Tea" in the U.S. means the hot beverage, regardless of British horror at how poorly we Yanks brew it.  "Iced tea" (or "ice tea") is the cold beverage.  In hot weather an American might use the back-formation "hot tea" to ensure understanding, but no one asking for a "cup of tea" would get iced tea.  Furthermore, in other Commonwealth countries (notably Australia and New Zealand), the phrase "white tea" is often used to indicate a preference for milk (versus "black tea" or "lemon tea", though the former may confuse Americans, who distinguish "black tea" from "herbal tea" (which the Brits call "an infusion"), and the latter (still with me?) can confuse black tea plus lemon with a lemon-flavored infusion) (whew!).  All this is to say, the hot beverage, with or without milk, is the common (middle column) definition. -- Gnetwerker 00:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article used to be strongly British-oriented, this resulting in many definitions of American meanings being not entirely correct. Additionally, this tea thing is a heritage of the 2-column version---those who wrote this down put "hot beverage" in the UK column assuming that, while Britishers are proud of invariably drinking their worldwide known traditional tea, Americans have a distorted perception of what tea is. And yes, the question is much more complex, but I guess you nailed it down. Things of changed now.--JackLumber 10:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tea

message: The Best of British gives another American meaning, which seems to be what we'd call a beggar.  Has anyone else heard of this meaning?  Not a single OneLook hit gives it. -- Smjg 14:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "vet" in the picture is in fact a veteran. Sadly, many war veterans wind up homeless and penniless. See this. --JackLumber 11:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vet 

message: Any justification for adding this? or is it too subtle and/or too technical. Or maybe I'm just plain wrong... In AmEng it seems to be generally understood to mean budgerigar, but in BrEng it would never mean that. In BrEng it is something like "any small parrot other than a budgerigar". Snalwibma 09:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My 2 cents worth---parakeet is kind of a catch-all term, budgerigar is much more specific. But, if I'm not mistaken, the "shell parakeet" and the "budgerigar" are the same bird, I should google it. --JackLumber 11:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was right, as usual ;-) Budgerigar and shell parakeet are synonyms. Anyway, if I were to be accurate, I wouldn't call a budgerigar just a "parakeet," the latter being a very general term. "Shell parakeet" would do. But, after all, I'm content with my robins and my bluebirds. --JackLumber 11:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parakeet 

message: Why not set this up as a comparison of U.S. English (American English if you like) and Commonwealth English? Most of the so-called British English stuff is equally valid in other English-speaking Commonwealth countries, and where it isn't we can say so. 202.175.143.143 00:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is going to get very complicated.  A small example is my request in Australia for an "off-license".  As an American, I would normally ask for a "liquor store", but being in a Commonwealth country, I automatically substituted the British phrase.  The Aussies had no idea what I was talking about -- they call it a "liquor store" (or a "bottle shop", which I'm not sure anyone else understands). -- Gnetwerker 07:02, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not being able to get any sleep or relief, I decided to boldly hang around here. And this is something I've been thinking of all along. I recently renamed the pages List of British English words not used in American English and List of American English words not used in British English as List of words mainly used in British English (link updated to List of British words not widely used in the United States because of proposed redirect deletion TrevorD 23:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh yes, I get a wee bit frosty if I canna have me dram.  But you ask for a "liquor store" in (e.g.) small-town Scotland, and they may understand what you mean, but they'll look at you like you have two heads. -- Gnetwerker 17:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, the word "liquor" is not apparently so idiomatic in British parlance, and "store" means different things in BrE and AmE. Speaking of that, I recently fine-tuned the entry for liquor in the main article. Further info will be provided in the upcoming entry for package.--JackLumber 19:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Och, keep yer hands off me package, wee man. -- Gnetwerker 19:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commonwealth, Australian, and Canadian English