Talk:Glossary of British terms not widely used in the United States/Archive 1

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Older move discussion

message: Hi everybody, this page should be arranged like its cousins List of words mainly used in American English (link updated to List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom because of proposed deletion of redirect page - TrevorD 19:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Remodeling

message: I've added crumpet and suggested it's known in the US as an English muffin.  Are they actually the same though?  To us in the UK, a crumpet is a flat disc about 3 inches across and three-quarters of an inch deep.  It's toasted and eaten with butter.  It's made in such a way that one side is plain, but the other side (and the depth of the crumpet) has scores of holes or dimples, thus allowing the butter to be spread thickly.  (A muffin used to be similar except that both surfaces were plain -- it was cut in half before toasting, making two flatter discs, to reveal the dimples.  Nowadays though, a muffin is likely to be the US version -- a small cake with a peaked top.) Pauld 01:13 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)
:It doesn't sound like it.  In the US an "English Muffin" usually runs about 6 inches across and more than an inch deep, evenly baked, and they don't soak up the butter from the outside, they have to be cut in half for that.  Wish I had a picture of one. - Hephaestos 01:16 29 Jun 2003 (UTC) (Well OK reading that over they're smaller than that, but still a long way from 3×¾.  Maybe it's because I'm hungry.  *grin* - Hephaestos
Hmm, does sound more like the original muffin than a crumpet.  I've changed to the page to say "similar to". Pauld 10:41 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
:In Canada we have both crumpets and English muffins. They are way not the same. Trontonian
::I'm only a year too late, but I just added a photo here (and at English muffin).  Elf | Talk 02:33, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: A while after the original discussion took place... A muffin is more like bread whilst a crumpet has holes. Then there's the pikelet which is similar to the crumpet but very thin, not to be mistaken with an american pancake or the french pancake. Captain scarlet 09:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crumpet/English Muffin

message: Are the words pension or pensioner used in America, dont they call a pension Social Security? G-Man 23:18, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Social security is the mandatory, government-(mis)managed retirement program. We use the word "pension" to refer to voluntary retirement plans managed by private insurance companies. Mkweise 15:33, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: 2 years later, I disagree; "pension" is used for the government-run Social Security program as well.  "I'm looking forward to my gigantic Social Security pension."  But the term "pensioner" is not used.  Tempshill 21:57, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely not a real-time conversation! Anyways, the term "pensioner" IS used, and means "one who receives a pension." It is NOT used, however, to refer to a senior citizen, retired person, or retiree, as in the only-British phrase "old age pensioner."--JackLumber 14:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pension/pensioner

message: Lush means drunkard in America, so I removed that meaning. Trontonian
:I seriously doubt that anything more than a very small percentage of people here in the U.S. would know what a lush was, and everyone else that does know knows it's a Britishism.  Lush here only has the meaning of say, lush foliage on a plant.
::The American Heritage Dictionary gives drunkard as a meaning of lush without designating it as British. Another possibility is that it's used in some regions of the States and not others. Trontonian 21:02, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I am accustomed to reading the word lush in American novels, with the meaning drunkard. I have never heard there is anything peculiarly British about that meaning ?
I have never heard "lush" used to describe a drunkard. I have heard people use the word lush to describe foliage. Greenmountainboy 03:33, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: I've always thought this was an Americanism (I'm British). I just looked it up in the OED, and sure enough, the meaning drunkard is given expressly as American usage of lush, not British. So I'm right ;-p Graham 04:22, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm suspecting regional variations, perhaps; I've lived in several parts of the U.S. and I'm quite familiar with both meanings.  Elf | Talk 02:35, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Lush

message: There are too many slang and vulgar expressions mixed up in the list (in contrast to List of American English words not used in British English). Perhaps we should have two lists on this page, one for normal usage and one for slang expressions. Mintguy (T) 09:22, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. A separate page for vulgar terms, i.e. List of British English words not used in American English (vulgar) would be good. Mr. Jones 13:54, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vulgarity 

message: What's the most common US term for skirting board? Is it baseboard?
:Well, what is a skirting board? Now a skirting table is where you separate out poor quality wool from a fleece. Rmhermen 18:20, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)
::It's the piece of wood at the bottom of a wall, next to the carpet Bluap
:Yes, baseboard. Elf | Talk 18:42, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Skirting board

message: Another mystery sign from my brief stay in London: "Weak subway."  What on earth--?  Is that a pedestrian underpass that's about to collapse on me?  Elf | Talk 18:42, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably. Never seen that one before. -- Necrothesp 19:57, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: It's not an expression I've ever heard before. Mintguy (T) 13:45, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It didn't look like a warning sign, though. Here's the sign--does context help?  Elf | Talk 17:10, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a warning sign, but it is definitely very uncommon. The 17T indicates a weight limit and you usually see this on bridges. This is obviously a case of a road tunnel with a weight restriction for some reason. "Weak Subway" is a new one on me. Putting "Weak Subway" into Google produces 10 hits, none of them from the UK. where precisely did you see this? Mintguy (T) 18:17, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Where precisely is a challenging question. My first evening there I was sooooo tired that I just sat on the top of one of those double-decker tour buses and sort of sat in a drooling trance as they drove me around the better part of tourist-infested London.  But that sign woke me long enough to snap a photo.  So somewhere in there. :-/  For all I know, we detoured (excuse me, diversioned?) into an alternate time-space continuum or maybe Canberra before taking me back to my hotel.  Elf | Talk 22:08, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm... , who knows then. BTW The British do not have a liking for making verbs out of nouns themselves, they tend to arrive from across the pond, so diversioned is wrong, but detoured is correct. Diverted is also correct though. Mintguy (T) 23:51, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Hmm. Looking at the picture, I would say what it actually means is that the pedestrian subway beneath the road is weak, which is the reason for the 17 ton axle limit on the road above. It's just to explain the reason to drivers (we're an indepedently minded people - we like to know the reasons for things), not to warn pedestrians that it might collapse. It is common on bridges. -- Necrothesp 01:24, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Weak subway

message: I just noticed on the trousers page that it talks of 'cuffs'. In Britain we would never refer to 'cuffs' on trousers, they would always be called 'turn-ups'. 'Cuffs' is only used in reference to shirt sleeves. In the context of trousers, are these always called 'cuffs' in the US? Mintguy (T) 13:45, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In my experience, yes. (I always have to say that because the U.S. is a big place...)  I've never heard the phrase "turn-up".  Elf | Talk 16:51, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Same here. --68.80.78.11 07:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Turn-ups on trousers (cuffs on pants)

message: Chap and chum were just listed as being British words not used in Am. Eng--not true; chum is pretty common in U.S., and chap is certainly used, although usually in a more facetious way.  Elf | Talk 20:14, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Chap and chum

message: I'd be interested to know why 'vulgar' was changed to 'crass' in the footnote. 'Vulgar' seems much more appropriate to me. -- Necrothesp 16:46, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Crass/Vulgar

message: I'm wondering, do the Americans use the term Wardrobe for the place where they hang their shirts, jackets, trousers etc? Ben W Bell 07:11, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: We usually call it a closet, unless it's a freestanding piece of furniture, in which case it is called an armoire, or sometimes a wardrobe. According to Merriam-Webster, wardrobe can be used to refer to a closet used to store clothes, but I would characterize that as a marked usage.Closet or clothes closet would be the usual term. The word wardrobe, however, is more often used to refer conceptually to the collection of clothing one owns, as in "I need to update my wardrobe with some new pants and a sweater". This is just my experience, which consists mostly of Californian and Northeastern usage. YMMV in other parts of the country. Certainly the word "wardrobe" is not viewed primarily as a Britishism, like "trousers" would be. Nohat 07:32, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto what Nohat said (including CA/northeast coverage :-) ). I've never heard wardrobe used for the small room or nook that we call a closet; only for furniture (as in [[The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
]]) or for one's collection of clothing. On the other hand, although trousers isn't commonly used, I wouldn't have considered it a Britishism.  Elf | Talk 15:57, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Wardrobe/Armoire

message: I see that "jammy" is listed as a British term here, but "jammies" isn't listed in any of these pages. In the U.S., it's child-speak for "pajamas" (as in, "time to put on your jammies!").  Does British English use the same thing? Elf | Talk 03:31, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, I've heard 'jammies' used as a diminutive of pyjamas - also 'jim-jams'. As well as the meaning of 'jammy' as a synonym for lucky in the UK, we have bicuits (cookies) called 'Jammy Dodgers' which I think is both a brand name and a generic term. Don't eat 'em, myself. Andy F 03:43, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Jammy/jammies

message: :to cop off with: to successfully engage the company of someone, usually of the opposite sex, for a period of time.
It's possible to interpret this sentence literally, but it seems awfully roundabout. In fact, it smells like a euphemism. If it's a euphemism, it ought to be recast so as to be more direct. There's no need for prissiness here. If it's not a euphemism, but simply meant to be interpreted literally, then it's a little too verbose and abstract and, well, euphemism-y (not to be confused with euphemistic). 
It's not clear to me exactly what is meant by "engage the company of". I surmise it just means "chat with". I'm also confused about "someone, usually of the opposite sex". Is this just a generic idiom for chatting or is there some element of mild flirting involved? If my assumptions are correct, then I suggest "to chat with" instead. Would someone familiar with the idiom care to clarify? Nohat 08:29, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It simply means "to pick up", in a sexual sense - to succeed in attracting a sexual partner. Interesting phrasing, I agree. -- Necrothesp 11:22, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I was trying to define "cop off with" in terms that weren't slang themselves, and trying to be mindful that a significant number of readers will not have English as a first language, or be at all familiar with British culture. I wasn't trying to be prissy.  Oh well.  "Copping off", often has a sexual connotation, but by no means always (at least in the usages I have heard).  If it is reported that "A has copped off with B", then the only inference that can be drawn is that A & B are enjoying each other's company to the exclusion of others.  What they are doing with their time in each other's company is a different matter - it could simply be sharing a milk-shake in McDonalds, or courting, dating, kissing, making out, shagging, shopping or any other mutually enjoyable occupation.   Anyway, I tend towards thinking in the abstract and looking for the underlying structures/meaning - probably too often for other people's taste.  Feel free to rewrite in less abstract and euphemistic-sounding terms. In that vein, Necrothesp seems quite good at tidying up my writing, for which I am grateful. -- WLD 00:08, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: True, it doesn't always mean to run off to have sex with. More, to have an element of sexual attraction. Glad you're not offended by me tidying things up. -- Necrothesp 14:11, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this mean? 

message: I removed a few words used in AE (brook, chump...). I think "via" and "piss poor" should be removed as well, but would like a second opinion. Rich Berry 20:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Dodgy" sounds very British to me; "piss off" is a coin flip; and "whatsit" sounds quite at home in America.  Tempshill 22:04, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of words - 2nd opinion requested on some candidates

message: I changed this list to a definition list format because it's a list of words with their definitions. This allows search engines like Google to figure out the semantic relation between the words and their definitions and provide more valuable content when searching for meanings of words. If you don't like the way the definition lists appear, then I would lobby to change the CSS formatting for definition lists. The markup, however, is semantically optimal. It's a list of definitions, so the appropriate markup is a definition list. It's not tabular data, so a table is inappropriate. Nohat 00:41, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: PS I agree that the default appearance for definition lists is kind of ugly, so I am trying to make as many of them as possible, so people become aware of their ugliness and perhaps someone with a flair for the CSS can fix it.  Nohat 09:00, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the reasoning and the update.  Making things easy for the machines and difficult for us humans seems a little perverse.  My POV is that a table is appropriate, so would like to see it reverted back.  This is not to say I disagree with your comments re: CSS formatting - I don't, but I'm not in agreement that deliberate uglification is the 'right' way forward.  Could deliberate uglification be construed by some as vandalism? WLD 09:08, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, definition lists are easier for humans to edit than the more complicated table formatting, and it has always been policy that, when choosing between nicer to look at or easier to edit, easier to edit wins. I was actually planning to put together a collection of pages containing definition lists and try to get some momentum on improving their appearance over the next few days. I know that it can be done, and I think the list on this page makes an excellent argument for improvement. I think we can agree that ideally, definition lists will be a) easy to edit, b) usable by search engines for proper semantic interpretation and c) attractive to look at. It seems like a much smaller hill to climb to go from a+b to a+b+c than to go from c to a+b+c. Nohat 09:57, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Format change

message: I'm rather suspicious of the equine etymology given. It sounds a lot like a Victorian bowdlerisation, along the lines of the classic brass monkey story. Can anyone give any evidence either way? PeteVerdon 15:09, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balls Up 

message: Do british people really call it candy floss?
here in Australia we call it fairy floss (im talking about the pink string sugar sticks).
:Yes, we do indeed call it "candy floss". Always have done. I've never heard the term "fairy floss". -- Necrothesp 12:24, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candy Floss? 

message: Perhaps a transatlantic translation of these ters could be added. Agony might qualify for the used differently article but the combination terms are unknown in AE. Rmhermen 17:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Agony aunt/agony column

message: Does anyone in the UK call the police vehicles used to cart off people who've been arrested paddy wagons, or am I dealing in anachronisms?
*It's a little old fashioned, but it's a slang term still used in the UK. exolon 03:23, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paddy wagons 

message: I found it surprising to see 'to mangle' in the list as 'name-mangling' (in C++) is a widely used term in computer programming.  I checked with my workmate from upstate New York and he confirmed that to mangle is definitely a term he understands and might even use.  I think 'to mangle' doesn't belong in this list.
Thomas Munro 13:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, only "mangle" (noun) belongs here. Mirror Vax 13:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And maybe not. In the U.S. a mangle was a type of machine for wringing/ironing clothes, but the last time I saw one was in the 1950s. As the machine went out of homes, the word went out of use. - Marshman 01:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To mangle 

message: This list has accumulated a large number of words that should be in the "used differently" list. I am unsure what should be done about words that are nouns in one dialect but only verbs in the other and vice-versa. I would tend to say keep them here. Just looking through G I found:
; away! : come on!
; bob : a shilling, 1/20th of a pound sterling, also five pence, and the coins of these denominations
; bonnet : the hood of a car
; boot : the trunk of a car
; cotton : thread
; ginger : person with red hair (sometimes pronounced with hard g's and rhyming with "ringer"); also, any type of carbonated soft drink (primarily used in Scotland)
; governor : (often shortened to gov or guv) boss or sir (often used in addressing one's boss or employer especially in a hierarchical workplace, or to a customer by service personnel, e.g., a taxi driver addressing the passenger) 
All of which are used with different meanings in American English. Rmhermen 15:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, all are common American words; just the definition. But that might be true for a lot of words on this list which probably have similar or same American/British meanings, but special British slang meanings (as most of the ones you list). - Marshman 01:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which means that they should not be here - we have a separate list for those words. Rmhermen 14:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs trimming

message: I've made a few changes, mostly adding to pre-existing words with the occasional added word. Some words I classify as a bit dodgy on this list, but for argument's sake I've decided to keep them. Boothman 12:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes

message: Has anyone else Heard of tis word? i certainly haven't. tommylommykins 16:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's a well known (in the UK at least). In fact, I can't really think of a synonym that I use regularly in place of klaxon. -- Boothman 19:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much on a daily basis. It's such a great word to use to describe someone with no hope what so ever to regain an acceptable status in society. Captain scarlet 19:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What? I thought a klaxon was an airhorn-type-thing. So in your place klaxon means "loser"? -- Boothman 20:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really in my area, I don't live in Hull where this expression originates from. Captain scarlet 20:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, its original meaning, of course, is "a type of motor horn" (probably from the name of the company that made them). More to the point, in regard to the entry here, however, is: What on earth is the proffered "definition" and idiot in regerance to Devo internet chav intended to mean? -- Picapica 10:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why this article exists. It presents words that are either used differently or do not exist in other country speaking variations of english. I have taken on board your concerns and refined the definition which hopefully describe the word more accurately. Captain scarlet 12:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Hmm. I wasn't really looking for lessons in grandmotherly ovisuction in the matter of the article's raison d'être, Captain, but thanks all the same for unscrambling the "cat walked across the keyboard" definition. -- Picapica 13:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Klaxon 

message: I moved this because 90% of the words are common across all Commonwealth English dialects. We can note regional peculiarities next to the individual terms. The alternative to moving the page was to eliminate most of the list. Ben Arnold 03:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember that sometime ago someone's attempt at moving "List of AmE words not used in BrE" to "List of AmE words not used in Commonwealth English" was causing the doom of that page, with all of its content getting vanquished... This move actually brings about a couple of issues: 1) it breaks the British/American symmetry found throughout the main article & related pages 2) it uses the phrase "Commonwealth English," a phrase I'm striving to shuck off, as it has zero or little support by authoritative publications and is probably original research. Anyway, please don't rename the List of words having different meanings in British and American English—I'm btw planning on expanding it to cover British, Austral, Canadian, and U.S. usage.--JackLumber 19:33, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well Ben, first off, mainland Europeans don't speak English, any, either as an official or a second language. They are taught English in school of course (and therefore are speakers of English as a foreign language, as virtually the whole rest of the world :-), and are more familiar with British usage, Britain being part of the European Union. (Watch out—most continental Europeans don't speak English, or do just a little.) But European learners of English sure are aware of American terminology (any EFL student should know both petrol and gasoline, holiday and vacation, etc., regardless of his/her geographic location), as much as they are not aware of many of the colloquialisms herein listed (or even American colloquialisms, for that matter.) [I can tell, I have contacts among Europeans and EFL students.] Second off, we should factor in the role of Canada. Canadian vocabulary features many so-called British words, but it's in fact much closer to U.S. lexicon—Oxford dictionaries oftenest regard Americanisms with collective N.Amer. or NAmE tags (rather than US). This being said, Britain, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand (and, to a lesser extent, South Africa and India—remember that English is actually a second language to South Africans and Indians) undoubtedly share a main body of words that are uncommon or nonexistent in North America. Oftentimes it is said that these countries speak (dialects of) "British English," but this is a misnomer, as you know better than I do—as you live in New Zealand, how can you possibly speak British English? The phrase "Commonwealth English" is even more of a misnomer, for the reasons we already explained. And yet the other option would be to split the whole enchilada into "US English" vs. "Non-US English," that is, the chestnut US vs. them ;-) (it would probably violate WP:NPOV). "International English" for "Commonwealth English" would be another unlikely term—linguists uses it in a different sense altogether, it would imply perhaps that North Americans don't fit in in an international layout, as they probably come from Mars or Jupiter... "Intercontinental English" would be better, as it would comprise Europe (British English), Oceania (Austral = (Australian + New Zealand) English), Central America (Caribbean English), yada yada yada. In sum, the only thing that disrupts is the lack of proper terminology. We can get along with our current "stopgap," though—it can't really faze me. The List of words having different meanings in British and American English is laid out in three columns—British meanings, common meanings, and American meanings. It would take just a little fine-tuning to change those columns to British + Austral meanings, common meanings, North American meanings. (Not right now though, I plan on this as a medium-/long-term project.) And yet the terminology thing would be clumsy again. Pam Peters' "Cambridge Guide to English Usage" never speaks of "Commonwealth English" (in spite of the fact that this book is actually the only reference cited by the Commonwealth English article...), but rather of British vs. American, often taking into account Australia and Canada (and, yes, occasionally, New Zealand...;-) — JackLumber 12:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi JackLumber. Having lived accross Europe I can assure you that the curriculum for most European countries does 'not include American (indeed, use here is american and english as opposed to american english and british english). Some english teachers do indeed have an american accent, having studied accross the pond, but their teaching is in line with national guidelines and teach english (that's english english). I can also assure you that most europeans are unaware of the differences between english and american having never heard american (films are dubbed in local language). I do not understand why and how User:Ben Arnold got away with moving a page relating specifically to the particularities of English. If users wish to include differences in say whichever other variation of english, eg: List of words mainly used in Australian English, List of words mainly used in Indian English. There wasn't an actual debate either. The page should be moved to where it was and a concensus reached before moving a popular page. As for use of the word Commonwealth, it is mainly confined to the... Commonwealth. Most countries just use the word 'English' (understand English English): This is all wrong ! there is now a need for a page stricly for 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 23:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As for how he moved it, see WP:Bold - you should have seen this place in the early days before most of the anarchists left. However, if you don't agree now is a good time for debate. There is a difficulty in making a simple page and making a complete listing. I note that this page has already changed from List of words used only in British English to list of words used mainly... Rmhermen 13:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Captain, all countries use the word "English." Including the U S of A. The language I speak is "English," not "American English." It becomes "American English" when it comes to compare it to other varieties of English. The same goes for Britain, Australia, etc. I indeed said that European learners of English are more familiar with British usage, but a learner who really claims to speak English cannot get freaked out if s/he is faced with "gasoline," "railroad car," "diaper," "vacation." Conversely, a foreign customer who's learning English "the American way" must nonetheless know "petrol," "railway carriage," "nappy," "holiday." As far as this article, if I were large and in charge, I would have retained the original title as explained above, but I would also add usage notes for those words that are not used in Australia/New Zealand/etc. or used in Canada. It was yours truly the one who introduced mainly. Lists of words not used here or there don't make much sense, we can't compartmentalize the language. Indeed, the guys and the chaps were oftener than not a-wrangling and a-changing and a-changing back and a-reverting back and forth ("It's not used!" "Yes it is!" "No it's not!"). Any way you look at it, this is all over now. Compare List of words mainly used in American English (link updated to List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom because of proposed deletion of redirect page - TrevorD 19:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In response to both users Rmhermen and JackLumber, glad to see some replies and although I'm showing my strong opposition to this move (and although I have been editing this article for a short period of time) I have not seen the tag, I usually at least comment in such situations. I thought the original scope of this article was to list words used in the UK ( understand English as I'm afraid it is commonly used this side of the world) and the US. That is why each time possible I have include in brackets the american wording. If blah blah blah this article is to remain named Commonwealth crappety whatever, I shall then open or reopen depending on the history and article on the differences between English and American (I do not wish to offend anyone with this wording I am merely applying common use) (that's common use not in the US) since the scope of the original article has been bastardised not by edition but renaming. By renaming articles in such ways it almost takes the whole fun of it away, I mean think of the pleasure someone has when adding a word such as wanker (slang and offencive), this is what it's all about. Captain scarlet 15:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

text: That's not what I meant. Actually I didn't even figure this botch. By renaming the page 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 23:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, therein lies your problem. You're using a U.S. dictionary to define the word British. I've checked the Cambridge Learner's Dictionary Online and it defines British as: relating to Great Britain or the United Kingdom. No reference to the Commonwealth. Note also that the term British Commonwealth is a U.S. term. The Commonwealth is not British. The British Empire was British, but the Commonwealth is specifically non-British. It's offensive to many in Commonwealth countries to call it British. The American Heritage Dictionary (answers.com) gives a similar definition of British to Webster's, but is at least sensitive enough to use the name Commonwealth of Nations. Ben Arnold 22:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Speaking of nationalities, your argument is flawless. But speaking of languages, you can cut me some slack can't you? My preference for "British English" is supported by the fact that all dictionaries label words like those in this page as Brit (OED New Edition) or BrE (Oxford Advanced Learner's). And, "British Commonwealth" ain't an American invention. Quote c. In full British Commonwealth (of Nations), the association of Great Britain and certain self-governing nations which were formerly dominions or colonies, together with all her dependencies and theirs, mostly owing allegiance to the British sovereign; = British Empire unquote. "commonwealth," Oxford English Dictionary.--JackLumber 13:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wait, I got it. What about List of distinctive British terms or something like that? Concise, direct, does not automatically imply that the words are not used here or there, fits in perfectly in the "British/American differences" project, can accommodate words also used in Australia, New Zealand, etc. but not words that are common only outside of the UK, and avoids not just the phrase "Commonwealth English" but also the phrase "British English." So?--JackLumber 18:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi SigPig! ...Hmmm, that would get complicated. Someone proposed a thing like that before (UK-US heterologues A-Z), and the outcome was just, as you see, an unsanitary butchery. This page was created as a spinoff of American and British English differences—so we used to have 1) a page for "British" words, 2) a page for "American" words, 3) a page for words with different meanings in UK and U.S. And yet "barrister" doesn't have the same meaning everywhere—as you know, a Canadian lawyer is actually a barrister and solicitor, the two professions being one; and in the U.S. "barrister" is sometimes used in a pejorative, non-technical way. If we want to figure in differences between, or among, all major dialects, i.e. American, Australian, British, and Canadian (in alphabetical order!), given that Canadian lexicon is similar to American and Australian is akin to British we could assume that the words on the "British" page are commmon in Australia and uncommon in Canada except where noted and that the words on the "American" page are common in Canada and uncommon in Australia except where noted, and adjust the gigantic List of words having different meanings in British and American English the way I suggested here some time ago. Factor in the List of words mainly used in Australian English and the List of words mainly used in Canadian English (the latter of which was created by yours truly), and the scenario is complete. Btw I apologize in advance for neglecting the Canadian English page, but I presently am kind of tangled in this issue—quite an undertaking...--JackLumber 20:22, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved 

message: Does that really belong here?  As far as I know, it was coined within the past couple years by Jeremy Clarkson, and in that sense it's actually become pretty popular in the US, at least on the internet and in print, thanks to pirated episodes of Top Gear.
Some of the epithets on this list (like fuckwit and spaz/spastic) are pretty common in the States.  Likewise pud also appears in American English, with a much more offensive connotation (referring to semen).  Queue is also used in American English... while "(stand in) line" is used instead in those day-to-day situations, "queue" is still used to describe the concept of a chronologically-ordered list in more abstract terms (such as when describing one's list of assigned tasks at work, or in computer programming). AKADriver 18:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the article indeed cries out for cleanup, as the big fat tag I posted a couple months ago suggests... "Queue" is in fact a word "mainly used in British English" in everyday speech (especially in idioms such as "jump the queue," which is uniquely British), but maybe could use a relocation to the List of words having different meanings in British and American English. Yes, "pud" has a different meaning altogether in the U.S., but I would regard it as nonstandard slang and hence not (yet, the language evolves...) worth mentioning. But I guess it would be pretty safe to remove "spaz" as you suggest. And yes, many terms that appear here are questionable indeed. Would you help me with the cleanup? --JackLumber 20:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flappy-paddle gearbox 

message: I'm a Brtion. Sellotape and sticky-backed plastic are similar but different substances. Sticky-backed plastic (always reminiscent of Blue Peter) is a large sheet of thin, soft, coloured plastic that's sticky on one side. Sellotape is a small roll of (on the most part) see-through, thin plastic used for sticking paper together, among many other uses. Different substances altogether - someone needs to change it. --Celestianpower háblame 21:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be akin to what I know as "contact paper."  Yes, a more accurate definition and a better explaination are called for. Hey Cel, while your adit, check out discussions No. 1 & 2. Best, JackLumber 21:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Discussions 1 & 2? --Celestianpower háblame 22:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, those at the top of the page about move proposals. Meanwhile I tried to fix that sticky thing. --JackLumber 22:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sticky-backed plastic 

message: Following the discussion in Talk:List_of_words_having_different_meanings_in_British_and_American_English#Driver.27s_licence.2Flicense I was proposing to add "driving licence" to this list of British/Commonwealth English. Then I looked at the article Driver's license!  According to that article, the UK & part of the Commonwealth uses the British term driving licence, whereas other parts of the Commonwealth use the American term driver's license but with British spelling!  In view of the discussion in the section #Moved above and the desire to include Commonwealth terms as well as British terms, I was uncertain how to enter these to avoid confusion and give a full picture.  Please see if what I've done is clear and acceptable.  I've also made a corresponding entry in the list of "mainly used in American English".  TrevorD 10:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I finetuned your entry... while renaming the page. That was one of the problems with the "Commonwealth" title---if we were to factor in usage from all over the Commonwealth we would wind up in an unsanitary mess. And after all, the Category is "American and British English differences," not "English differences around the world." Let's face the facts---British & American are the two major varieties, and Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. all have their own articles with words peculiar to each dialects. JackLumber 11:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The main article intro could stand some remodeling---the Commonwealth thing aside, it's a little confusing; see all those recent changes to the "Liberia" parentheses... Btw, once upon a time the intro actually foregrounded "American English" and "British English"; incidentally, the user who prioritized "Commonwealth English" was later blocked indefinitely.--JackLumber 19:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Driver's/Driving licence 

message: I've just added:
*"pillar box" and "pillar-box red" to this list of British words; and
*"mailbox" to the list of different US & UK meanings.
Are:
*letter box
*post box
*postman
(commonly) used in the US (or is it always "mailbox", "mailman")?
Should they be added to either list?
TrevorD 10:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Letter box is the "Britishest" of the 3. But I guess it's pretty safe to add them, as they help characterize English as spoken in Britain. And btw, the term "mail carrier" or "letter carrier" are now preferred (you know, non-sexist language...)--JackLumber 19:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Come now - no-one uses that. It's postman and postwoman universally. --Celestianpower háblame 21:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Celestianpower, are you talking about UK or US?  No-one in the UK would say "mail carrier", but would anyone in the US say "postman" or "postwoman"? TrevorD 22:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought it was clear I was talking about American usage. "Postman" is used sometimes in the U.S., but it has much more currency outside of the U.S., as Celestianpower points out. (Assuming that "universally" means "outside America" to Celestianpower. Hey Cel, looks like we Yanks come from another, maybe parallel, universe to you ;-)  --JackLumber 12:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Jack.  It was clear to me that you were talking about the US.  That's why I addressed my comment to Celestianpower: I read his comment "universally" to include America.  Anyway, as you'll have seen, I have added the listed terms.  TrevorD 12:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  (edit conflict) Sorry, since you mentioned that letter box being the "Britishest", I thought the whole post was about UK. And universally meant "in my experience in the UK". Anyway, from my experience (in the UK), we use postbox (for the big red box that people put letters in to send to other people), letter box (for where the postman puts letters for you - you know, in your front door) and postman/postwoman (the letter delivery people) exclusively here. Hope that helps! --Celestianpower háblame 12:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No prob whatever! But letterbox could probably use an entry on the List of different meanings, as the motion picture-related meaning is current in both dialects.--JackLumber 13:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mail / Post