BBC - Americanisms: 50 of your most noted examples

I edited my post, but while editorials are editorials, imagine reading one like this on a visit to the States with the roles reversed.  How about here, by a new poster complaining about British English?  Would you be as easy to let it slide, or would you see that writer as prejudiced, insular and ignorant?

ETA: And before we forget, this is someone who asked for feedback on his article.  Or should the only feedback a writer should get is that which agrees with him or her?  The only emotions that should be provoked are those similar to the writer?  It's okay to get upset about something enough to write two articles about it (and they aren't the first in various outlets on the subject recently), but not to comment on it?

Of course it's OK to comment on it. But it's also OK for me to comment by saying that I don't think it's such a big deal.

I never said you couldn't.  I am just responding to it.

Oh, and for those of you who don't know, this writer has had his articles posted here before:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Matthew+Engel

Scroll down to the bottom of the list.  It's a favourite subject of his.  Too bad he gets enough interest in it to outweigh any reason for him to listen to the people correcting him.

I never said you couldn't.  I am just responding to it.

And I never said you said I couldn't. This is getting a bit ridiculous. Don't you think?

You initially responded to my comment that opinions aren't really that big a deal by saying:

It's okay to get upset about something enough to write two articles about it (and they aren't the first in various outlets on the subject recently), but not to comment on it?

So, really, what it sounds to me that you're doing is accusing me of saying it's not OK to comment - something I never did. I would never deny anyone the right to comment and express an opinion. Not the author of the article, not the people who commented on it on the BBC site and certainly not forum members here.

For you to imply that somehow I don't think it's OK for people to comment is ludicrous.

Everyone is free to hold his or her opinion and to express that opinion. I am also free to think that are bigger issues in the world than a slightly silly editorial.

You said that you didn't see what the big deal was, and I pointed out exactly what the big deal was.  By all means, go ahead and focus on the bigger issues in the world, and don't worry about what's posted here. 

I think the writer is a horrible bigot and would be called such if the country he focused upon was any other country than the US.

By all means, go ahead and focus on the bigger issues in the world,

Thank you. 

I guess I am fortunate that I have some ability to multi-task the things which some people must feel are small and petty and still not lose sight of what are usually seen the bigger issues.   

I guess I am fortunate that I have some ability to multi-task the things which some people must feel are small and petty and still not lose sight of what are usually seen the bigger issues.   

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, Legs? 

Nope.  I am just wondering why you're not off saving the world.    (this is meant to be a ribbing and not an overly sarcy comeback.)

I think the writer is a horrible bigot and would be called such if the country he focused upon was any other country than the US.

While he may be a horrible bigot, what I see is a writer who keeps cashing in on & therefore trotting out altered versions of the same old tired article/idea - because apparently, rags such as The Daily Mail, and now the BBC as well is willing to pay him for it.  I think he'll keep collecting on it as long as they keep paying them him for it - probably being a slow news day & they are in (clearly) desperate need of filler material.  

The original article was not about what terms Americans use different to Brits, but more about how more and more of those terms are coming into common usage in Britain.
We don't really care that they say sidewalk instead of pavement, and yes fanny for bottom is amusing as I'm sure us calling a cigarette a fag is to Americans.
What the issue is, is an influx particularly in the last 10-20 years of an acceptance of using the American phrase or word rather than the British.
I'm usually one of the first to say that a reason for this is media, films and TV. The language seperated a few hundred years ago and developed on both sides of the Atlantic, it's natural that words took on different meanings or that things got different names. It's also interesting to note, as Bill Bryson points out in his book "Made in America" that actually many American terms derive from the old English, in fact there are a number that are close to Yorkshire dialect I've noticed.
It's only since cinema that the language started to come together again, and now moreso as we have so many TV channels so that we get a lot of American programming. One of the things that has caused this influx as well is an overwhelming amount of childrens programming originating in the US, so school age and pre-school children are being exposed to a different culture.
Why can't we get annoyed at some sayings? I get annoyed at the misuse of "pre" like in "pre-order, pre-book", I don't know if that originated in the US or not, but it riles me. I'm guilty of pronouncing lieutenent the American way, I've always done it and didn't realise it was wrong (in a British sense) until I was 20....that obviously came from watching American war films.
I'm not sure if I was trying to make a point here or not! Just my two penneth worth....or should I say my 2 cents worth?!

You can get annoyed all you want.  It doesn't mean that some of your annoyance isn't rooted in a very universal human fault.  I think the "cultural imperialism" argument is over-used and is excusing an underlying xenophobia.  There are several links on this thread to answers to the original article pointing out where the author's assumptions were incorrect.  And yes, I pointed out "fanny pack" because that was used in the second article which was a list of so called "Americanisms".  The fact is only used there is a very valid point about the ridiculousness of some of the examples.  It's not the only reason why the examples of "Americanisms" are out of order.

You have every right to hold any sort of view you want to hold.  You even have the right not to examine where these views are rooted [EDIT: I am not saying that you are a bigot, either.  Just that hating something just because of where it's from might mean that you might be a bit].  But I guess I should be glad that I come from a country and culture that is seen as so strong and resilient that I am never meant to feel insulted when it is constantly demeaned in my chosen home's media.

The English you speak is no more the original English than the one spoken in Ohio. Americans are one of the biggest immigrant groups in this country.  And while the media is a huge source of American usage, it's not the only source.

Talking about the influence of American culture on British culture can be done without putting down American culture.  I rarely hear it done that way without negatively characterising American culture.

I don't think people shouldn't criticise American policies, political, corporate, cultural or otherwise.  I do think that when it becomes a sport or totally baseless it becomes a bit off putting.  We should celebrate our linguistic differences without being so defensive of change.  Do we we really think that a language as diverse as English, where even in America there are several dialects and accents, is really going to be homogenised so easily?  And if we trade a few words (and the exchange does work both ways) is the language really what cultural difference is all about?

And who actually likes corporate speak?  I believe that that's where things like "pre-order" are rooted.  And as for "leftenent" vs "lootenent", there are plenty of BrE speakers who prefer the latter, and I don't know if it is American media influence or actual variations of usage in the UK itself.  

RE: Lieutenant:

Pronunciation

Pronunciation of lieutenant is generally split between the forms /lɛfˈtɛnənt/ (lef-ten-ənt) and /ljuːˈtɛnənt/ ( listen) (lew-ten-ənt), with the former generally associated with the United Kingdom, Ireland and Commonwealth countries, and the latter generally associated with the United States.[1] The earlier history of the pronunciation is unclear; Middle English spellings suggest that the /l(j)uː-/ and /lɛf-/ pronunciations existed even then.[2] The rare Old French variant spelling luef for Modern French lieu ('place') supports the suggestion that a final [w] of the Old French word was in certain environments perceived as an [f].[2]

In Royal Naval tradition—and other English-speaking navies outside the United States—the intermediate pronunciation /ləˈtɛnənt/ was preserved. This is not recognized as current by the OED, however, and by 1954 the Royal Canadian Navy, at least, regarded it as "obsolescent" even while regarding "the army's 'LEF-tenant'" to be "a corruption of the worst sort".[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieutenant#Pronunciation

Isn't there a chance that's it's neither xenophobia nor bigotry, but simple annoyance? I don't think annoyance necessarily has to have some underlying big issue. Sometimes it just means being annoyed.

Isn't there a chance that's it's neither xenophobia nor bigotry, but simple annoyance? I don't think annoyance necessarily has to have some underlying big issue. Sometimes it just means being annoyed.

No one becomes annoyed without an underlying issue.  And people don't resort to the sort of language Matthew Engel does over the number of articles all the while ignoring corrections to his assumptions without being a big old bigot.


ETA: For those of you who think that these articles that Engel writes are pretty much spot on, what year should we freeze British English?  Which sub-dialect?

There is a massive thread on this very forum called 'the most annoying expressions', and it is quite often full of Americans whingeing about how stupid/annoying/weird a British expression or word or pronunciation is. Have you been on there to tell them they're all bigots, Legs?