Things that Americans find odd about the UK

Using the word "negative" instead of "minus" when saying negative numbers aloud is a USA thing dating from the "New Math" of the 1960s. For Americans who went to school before then, and natives of most other English speaking countries, the normal way to pronounce -1 is "minus one".

That would explain why I've heard older American use minus instead of negative.

oh, maths. My daughter came to me with GCSE prep maths homework she didn't understand, the question was to write the bounds of each number, with a list of numbers. So for example, the bounds of 80 to the nearest 5 unites would be what? We had to google, found on BBC that they were referring to rounding up/down, so the bounds would be 75 and 84. Cool, I thought we had figured it out, but no, the bounds are 75 and 85? I can't get my head around that.

I remember hearing minus and negative interchanged in that way when I was at school. Maybe Ohio was just behind the times, because we were still calling it 'new math' in the 80s. I think this is maybe another of those situations where people are generalising US and UK again when they're actually just talking about their personal experiences. Looking through the thread I don't think any of the things listed ever struck me as particularly odd, and I'm not sure I even noticed that they were that different. Treble and fortnight are different, but I had read enough British literature to know of them, and was quite pleased that people still used them!

Not having children in school (well, not having children at all), I have never heard the term "bounds" before.

I'm guessing the bounds of 80 are 75 to 84 because 85 would round  up to 90 and 74 would round down to 70?

I'm guessing the bounds of 80 are 75 to 84

The question asks

the bounds of 80 to the nearest 5

The nearest '5' (multiple of 5) to 80 is 75 and the nearest '5' to 80 is 85

Hi everyone! 

Once again, let's consider a few guidelines on posting here:

1) Name calling and personal attacks are not okay.

2) It is true there can be better, more considerate or tactful ways of making a point, however...

3) Everyone is entitled to their own opinions & experiences.

4) Also not every post that maybe rubs one person the wrong way is necessarily directed as something personal against that person (hey how many times can I use 'person' in one sentence?), nor will it be an affront to everyone else.

5) Please just be nice. 

Some of us from the US find various things odd, or even weird, about the UK & its people.  Others will not.  Some people in the UK find various things odd, or even weird, about the US & its people.  Others will not.  We can agree to disagree.  Your mileage may vary.  So on & so forth.

When I'm having a bad day or have struggled with something or maybe I'm just being silly, I have been known to say to DH - What am I doing living here in weirdy-weirdo land?!  To which he replies that no - I (meaning me, his wife) am actually the one who comes from weirdy-weirdo land.  And we have a good laugh & go on with our life together.  We don't grab a stick & poke it in each other's eyes - we save that for when we are trying to do DIY together or agreeing on a colour to paint the bathroom.

We have a glorious weekend stretching out before us...so if you find what strangers are posting on t'internet (yes I know someone will find that term irritating or odd or weird - ha!) too irritating or grating, maybe it's time to take a break, get out there & enjoy our amazing British weather. 

Er, no, it's an operator, the 1 is the operand.

You're right; I was in a hurry and used the wrong word. But I stick by my original point that I, an American, consider the way Brits say "minus seven" to be rather odd.

You're right; I was in a hurry and used the wrong word. But I stick by my original point that I, an American, consider the way Brits say "minus seven" to be rather odd.

And I repeat my point that it's not just "the Brits" who say "minus seven", but, in fact, all the other people in the English speaking world, and added to that, all the Americans who were not subjected to "New Math".

As stated just a couple of posts back - read up, personal attacks are not okay and I mean personal attacks of any sort.

If you have a personal quibble with another forum member, then please take it to PM.

If you have a problem with another member's post, please use the 'Report to Mod' feature.

If you find another forum member is getting up your nose regularly, the little red bar on the left side under their basic profile info - well that handy feature allows you to put a person on 'ignore' so you won't be able to see any of their posts.

This thread is locked for now on a cooling off period.  I will reopen it again later on, on the condition that no more personal attacks occur.

As stated just a couple of posts back - read up, personal attacks are not okay and I mean personal attacks of any sort.

If you have a personal quibble with another forum member, then please take it to PM.

If you have a problem with another member's post, please use the 'Report to Mod' feature.

If you find another forum member is getting up your nose regularly, the little red bar on the left side under their basic profile info - well that handy feature allows you to put a person on 'ignore' so you won't be able to see any of their posts.

I am unlocking this topic now; however, the advice so wisely given by Mrs Robinson needs to be followed.  I would also like to remind members of the expected behaviour if you chose to participate in this forum.

The question asks

The nearest '5' (multiple of 5) to 80 is 75 and the nearest '5' to 80 is 85

I misread Leah's post. I thought she said that the answers was 75 to 84, and I tried to explain it.

I never heard "5" (or any number) used to mean "multiple of 5" (or multiple of that number).

To me, 5 means 5.

And 10 means 10.  100 isn't a 10; it's a multiple of 10.

Just a way of saying things that I'm not used to.

Actually, I was trying to recall the problem from memory, I'm sorry. The question is exactly:

The following have been measured to the nearest unit. What are their upper and lower bounds.
a. 85cm
b. 3km
...

No textbooks, no instruction sheets or examples, just class notes of which she missed that day.

I find the whole "Miss vs Mrs vs Ms" to be odd. I wouldn't use one if applications would let me not fill one in.

Actually, I was trying to recall the problem from memory, I'm sorry. The question is exactly:


No textbooks, no instruction sheets or examples, just class notes of which she missed that day.

Okay so this is pretty simple, consider that someone said to you, "I've measured this length to the nearest cm, it's 85cm long" this means that the actual measurement could be less or more than 85cm so you can then from this determine the "range" at which someone could measure something and when rounded to the nearest cm the value be 85cms.

As the initial value is measured in cm, cm are your "unit". The next unit down would be mm, so you need to consider at how many mm would you round up to cms (we know from experience that at 5mm you round up to cm)

Therefore :-
The shortest length that the person measured must be 84.5 cm or more because a lower length would have rounded down to 84 cm.
and
The longest length the person measured must be less than 85.5 cm because 85.5 cm would have been rounded up to 85 cm.

So in conclusion -
The lowest possible length would have been 84.5 cm i.e the lower bound.
The highest possible length must have been less than 85.5 cm. i.e the upper bound.

Is that clearer? The reason you're getting confused as this question is specifically about lengths and units, if you just quote the question as numbers, it makes much less sense.

Ah. That makes more sense with the explanation of the 'upper bound', which is above what you're actually rounding down from. My British partner hadn't heard of it either, so he was no help. Thanks!