 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / British English / February 2004Losing battle - "must of"
I'm fighting a losing battle with my six-year old son with "have" used as an auxilliary. He will say, for example, "I must of lost it." I correct him, and he remembers until he goes back to school - it must be in common usage in the playground. I'm assuming that as soon as his reading improves just a little, it will go away, but the fact that it must be part of playground English is interesting, if not a little scary. I first came across this "corruption" (please provide a better description!) in an otherwise poorly written posting to a newsgroup in 1998. At that time, I put it down to the individual's poor level of literacy, but I've since noticed its written occurrence more and more often. However, my son's utterance was the first verbal example for me. Do I live too sheltered a life? Is this becoming a common colloquialism? Am I wrong in assuming it is a colloquialism that migrated to written English, rather than vice versa. >I'm fighting a losing battle with my six-year old son with "have" used >as an auxilliary. He will say, for example, "I must of lost it." I [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >often. However, my son's utterance was the first verbal example for me. > Do I live too sheltered a life? If you had of got out more you would of come across it more often. On the other hand, there can be benefits in a sheltered life. >Is this becoming a common >colloquialism? Regrettably, yes. Last year I was watching a 'reality' TV show involving people of at least average intelligence and literacy. When someone said "would have" someone else corrected her by saying "would of". Cringe! >Am I wrong in assuming it is a colloquialism that >migrated to written English, rather than vice versa. I share your assumption - but I could of got it wrong. ;-)  SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) > Last year I was watching a 'reality' TV show involving people of at least > average intelligence and literacy. When someone said "would have" someone > else corrected her by saying "would of". Cringe! I'm seen TV presenters use it regularly on the lower channels. > >Am I wrong in assuming it is a colloquialism that > >migrated to written English, rather than vice versa. > > I share your assumption - but I could of got it wrong. ;-) Have course you of. cheers, It's a contraction that's common in speech, but seldom is taught in writing so that people without a good ear assume must be written "of" instead of "'ve" to show the contracted form of "have." Must have is spoken hurriedly as "must've" and gets translated by some into "must of" both in writing and later in speech. Could've, would've, should've, can've, did've, will've, shall've all are similarly contracted in performance, and all get like treatment in written form. The negatives are even uglier, couldn't've, shouldn't've, wouldn't've, can't've, didn't've, won't've, shan't've, and they don't look any prettier if you think orthographically they should be spelled in the pattern "couldn't'ave". If someone hears and spells this as "of" it may be due to hypercorrection or back-formation of a colloquialism (when children learn "of" that may be what they construct internally as well as what they perform. >>I'm fighting a losing battle with my six-year old son with "have" used >>as an auxilliary. He will say, for example, "I must of lost it." I [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > I share your assumption - but I could of got it wrong. ;-) or "could of gotten it wriong" > It's a contraction that's common in speech, but seldom is taught in > writing so that people without a good ear assume must be written "of" [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > > > I share your assumption - but I could of got it wrong. ;-) > It's a contraction that's common in speech, but seldom is taught in > writing so that people without a good ear assume must be written "of" [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > learn "of" that may be what they construct internally as well as what > they perform. In short, it's pure ignorance. Send them back to school. SignatureRgds Peter R Humphrey Buxton, Derbyshire > I'm fighting a losing battle with my six-year old son with "have" used > as an auxilliary. He will say, for example, "I must of lost it." I [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > colloquialism? Am I wrong in assuming it is a colloquialism that > migrated to written English, rather than vice versa. The original (and correct) colloquialism is "must've" (and this is the one your son should be using). People who don't write very often who come to write this down write "must of" because that's the closest they can get to the sound that's in their head and have it look like English. This phenomenon has existed for decades: my grandmother's teachers were telling her off for doing it in the 1930s. Now that more and more illiterate people are writing (thanks to cellphones and email) "must of" is gaining ground, and so is the spelling pronunciation. Timeline: must have (written) > must'v (spoken) > must've (educated written) > must of (uneducated written) > must ov (spoken) And there's also "musta": "He musta done it." Even that is preferable to "must of". Adrian > I'm fighting a losing battle with my six-year old son with "have" used > as an auxilliary. He will say, for example, "I must of lost it." I [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > colloquialism? Am I wrong in assuming it is a colloquialism that > migrated to written English, rather than vice versa. The weak pronunciation of "have" and the weak pronunciation of "of" are basically the same, so "must've" sounds like "must of". There's nothing basically wrong with this pronunciation. If you have no problem with "I've" or "he's" or "don't" then you shouldn't worry about "must've". Such weak pronunciations are a normal part of standard English pronunciation and have been for a long time. The real problem is the incorrect spelling. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan >> I'm fighting a losing battle with my six-year old son with "have" used >> as an auxilliary. He will say, for example, "I must of lost it." I [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Regards, Einde O'Callaghan Agreed. Unfortunately, his pronunciation of "of" is by no means weak. The vowel sound is similar to that in "hot", rather than the vowel sound at the apostrophe in must've, which in my pronunciation is somewhere I think between a short "a" (uh), and the sound in French "de". > The weak pronunciation of "have" and the weak pronunciation of "of" > are basically the same, so "must've" sounds like "must of". There's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > The real problem is the incorrect spelling. And people who replace the weak pronunciation of "of/have" with the wrong strong form. -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II web site www.mike-stevens.co.yk Old grammarians never die, they simply parse away. > I first came across this "corruption" (please provide a better > description!) in an otherwise poorly written posting to a newsgroup in > 1998. At that time, I put it down to the individual's poor level of > literacy, but I've since noticed its written occurrence more and more > often. However, my son's utterance was the first verbal example for me. You're lucky; I first saw it /in writing/ in a position paper submitted by an Army Major on an MSc course back in the *early* 1990s. Talk about cringe-making. Aurally, the 've of "could've" has always sounded (in BrEnglish) like "of"; the difference today seems to be that it's NOT being elided into the preceding word, but pronounced most distinctively separately. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 > Aurally, the 've of "could've" has always sounded (in BrEnglish) like > "of"; ...in its unstressed form /@v/: could've /kVd@v/, must've /mVst@v/. > the difference today seems to be that it's NOT being elided into > the preceding word, but pronounced most distinctively separately. This is the phenomenon of "spelling pronunciation": pronouncing a word according to how you spell it (even if you spell it wrong), rather than the normal way. This is common among people who don't understand (because no-one's ever told them, or because they've been poorly taught) the differences between the spoken and the written language. Notice that the opposite error isn't made: I've never seen "He's one've the boys" or "a leg've lamb". Adrian >> Aurally, the 've of "could've" has always sounded (in BrEnglish) like >> "of"; [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > according to how you spell it (even if you spell it wrong), rather than the > normal way. <snip> Ok, but there was a not very good pronunciation in the first place, I guess. Children learn to speak before they can write. SignatureEnrico C ~ No native speaker > >> Aurally, the 've of "could've" has always sounded (in BrEnglish) like > >> "of"; [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > guess. > Children learn to speak before they can write. Given that there was once a time when no-one said "must of", there must have been, and must be, people who (have) changed from the "must've" to the "must of" pronunciation during their lives, under the influence of what they have seen and/or heard. Once "must of" is established in people they will pass it on to their peers and to their children. Adrian >> Aurally, the 've of "could've" has always sounded (in BrEnglish) like >> "of"; [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >no-one's ever told them, or because they've been poorly taught) the >differences between the spoken and the written language. A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they honestly believe that it should be pronounced like it is spellt. It is interesting to me as a new phenomenon in linguistic change which is driven by the written word. Before the growth of universal literacy changes in pronunciation were driven mainly by the influence of one's peers, friends and neighbours. A parallel influence comes from the entertainment media, with, in Britain in particular, the growing habit of a rising cadence at the end of a non-questioning sentence, which has come in with the long-running Australian soap operas on TV over the past 20 years or so. A few hundred years ago these influences simply did not exist, and linguistic change was rather slower. SignatureDave OSOS#24 dswindell.gerbil@tcp.co.uk Remove my gerbil for email replies Yamaha XJ900S & Wessex sidecar, the sexy one Yamaha XJ900F & Watsonian Monaco, the comfortable one http://dswindell.members.beeb.net >A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they >honestly believe that it should be pronounced like it is spellt. It'll be interesting when they get around to Grand Prix. SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en > route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > A few hundred years ago these influences simply did not exist, and > linguistic change was rather slower. No, linguistic change was much faster. If there were no written records or national media to tell you that "must of" was wrong and "must have" was correct, "must of" would become correct within a generation. The fact that we have written texts going back many years acts as a huge drag on linguistic development. If the only language you were aware of was that spoken by your neighbours, what was colloquial for one generation would become the standard for the next, to be replaced by new colloquialisms in the following generation. Throughout the world and history it can be observed that where there is little literacy or central government or culture, languages diverge very rapidly. Matthew Huntbach >> A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >> route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >national media to tell you that "must of" was wrong and "must have" was >correct, "must of" would become correct within a generation. Perhaps I should have been a bit more precise on what I was talking about in "linguistic change". There are all sorts of things to do with simplification of grammar, attrition of dialect and change of accent. But nevertheless I disagree with you. My particular experience relates to Northumberland in England. Chaucer apes the Northumbrian dialect/accent in the Canterbury Tales, because it was the country bumkin accent of its time, for educated southerners at least. His aping of the dialect still rings true today in rural areas, and is also reflected in the wealth of dialect writing up today; and I assure you that Northumbrian dialect is alive and well. The dialect is certainly changing in some areas, with particular influences identified in old industrialised areas where incomers came from many parts of Britain particularly during the 19th century. The language of the aspiring "upper class" is also rather different from the dialect such people may have used in the streets as children, with many words being dropped, and the accent "tidied up" to sound, to their ears, a bit posher. So, in Northumberland at least, there was little change in the dialect from before Chaucer's time till well into the 19th century. Since then education, mobility and visual/aural entertainment and news media have all taken their toll. SignatureDave OSOS#24 dswindell.gerbil@tcp.co.uk Remove my gerbil for email replies Yamaha XJ900S & Wessex sidecar, the sexy one Yamaha XJ900F & Watsonian Monaco, the comfortable one http://dswindell.members.beeb.net << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >> route" as "enn rowt". >> As a USEnglish speaker of advanced age, let me say that I have always been in doubt of the correct pronunciation of "route" in English, let alone French, but say "root" when I speak of the quickest route to town, and "rowt" when I speak of the route of the defeated army. Russ Russ > << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American > pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > alone French, but say "root" when I speak of the quickest route to > town, and "rowt" when I speak of the route of the defeated army. Surely the last is usually written "rout" rather than "route"? -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk "Million-to-one chances come up nine times out of ten." (Terry Pratchett) > > << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American > > pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > quickest route to town, and "rowt" when I speak of the route of the > > defeated army. > Surely the last is usually written "rout" rather than "route"? Not if it's their way home. The military pronunciation of "route" is indeed "rowt". Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/joachim/02-0.htm When Joachim was born, on the stroke of midnight, it took the midwife no more than a single look to restore her wavering faith in the Adversary. >> > << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American >> > pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Not if it's their way home. The military pronunciation of "route" is >indeed "rowt". But only as long as it means a hasty retreat. SignatureDave OSOS#24 dswindell.gerbil@tcp.co.uk Remove my gerbil for email replies Yamaha XJ900S & Wessex sidecar, the sexy one Yamaha XJ900F & Watsonian Monaco, the comfortable one http://dswindell.members.beeb.net >>Not if it's their way home. The military pronunciation of "route" is >>indeed "rowt". >> >But only as long as it means a hasty retreat. Nor sure about that. "Oh Polly, lovely Polly, The rout has just begun. And we must go a-marchin' To the beating of the drum..." [High Germanee] A rout (pronounced "rowt") could be an assembly, just as much as a retreat. [NB: Cross-posted to uk.music.folk. If the discussion hereafter swerves away from folk music references to the word rout, please remove the cross-posting by setting follow-ups accordingly.] SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) >>> Not if it's their way home. The military pronunciation of "route" is >>> indeed "rowt". [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > away from folk music references to the word rout, please remove the > cross-posting by setting follow-ups accordingly.] My rather aged Concise Oxford Dictionary gives as one definition of rout - force or fetch out of bed, house or hiding place. That would seem to fit the song fairly well. The phrase to 'root out' is from the same source. Pete MacGregor On 23/1/04 12:47 am, in article opr17ds5qqh00huk@news.demon.co.uk, "Pete MacGregor" <peter@bearfld.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>>> Not if it's their way home. The military pronunciation of "route" is >>>> indeed "rowt". [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > the song fairly well. The phrase to 'root out' is from the same source. > Pete MacGregor In fact that is accurate. For a long time I thought the 'rout' referred to a losing battle, but it doesn't - it refers to recruiting, or 'beating up', or 'drumming up' - the last phrase has of course survived re business etc. In Britain, the term predates the recruiting-sergeant scenario. Tenants of many feudally originated estates owed a duty of military service to their lord, and right up to the 19th century continued to honour this; the 'rout' would be the town drummer calling them to arms. Although it's not easy to relate to this now, town drummers or pipers played different beats or tunes to indicate different things (this probably survived longer in Scotland and the North than in the south and cities) and the message would have been understood. If you come across a tune called a 'rout' it might not be a rowdy dance (which is what it sounds like to us) but a tune used in a call to arms. The top reference to East/West US pronunciation of route for road, and connecting with retreast, are coincidental. Rout in a battle refers to the action of the victor in chasing the loser, not to the action of the loser retreating. It's a transitive fing. David David Kilpatrick wrote on "Pronunciation of "rout" (Was Losing battle - "must of")" >In Britain, the term predates the recruiting-sergeant scenario. rec *ruit* ing-sergeant ?? Got me looking .. the Norman French ran our military in the middle ages and French for recruit is "la recrue" verb "recruter" My dictionary doesn't list the root verb "-cruter" but "cru" (accents omitted for Usenet) is p.p of both "croire" = believe and "croitre " = grow in numbers. So the latter looks the source. cru = "increased" So a relation to "rout" - surely from "la route" seems unlikely You can switch off now .. chris SignatureChris Ryall (snip spamtram Wirral-UK to email me) > The top reference to East/West US pronunciation of route for road, and > connecting with retreast, are coincidental. Rout in a battle refers to the > action of the victor in chasing the loser, not to the action of the loser > retreating. It's a transitive fing. "Rout" gets used both transitively and intransitively. The victor may rout the loser, but it is also common to say the loser routed. I think the latter use is something of a neologism, but I'm not sure. It's a useful term, though. Apart from anything else, military history is full of examples of armies disappearing from a battle in disarray without the enemy needing to do much. The Spanish army (at... um... Talavera?) for example, where they were so shocked by the sound of their own volley that they fled. The Persians are recorded as doing similar things when faced by the Greeks and Macedonians (those great unbiased historians). It seems a little aggrandising to say "A routed B" when all A did was show up. > "Rout" gets used both transitively and intransitively. The victor may > rout the loser, but it is also common to say the loser routed. I > think the latter use is something of a neologism, but I'm not sure. It's certainly new to me. This is the only time I've ever known of it. I would say it is quite wrong. ----------- GC Gwilym Calon wrote on "Pronunciation of "rout" (Was Losing battle - "must of")" In group:uk.music.folk, Sat, 24 Jan 2004 (13l) >> "Rout" gets used both transitively and intransitively. The victor may >> rout the loser, but it is also common to say the loser routed. I >> think the latter use is something of a neologism, but I'm not sure. > >It's certainly new to me. I've heard of losing armies routing - OED anyone? SignatureChris Ryall (snip spamtram Wirral-UK to email me) > I've heard of losing armies routing - OED anyone? http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=rout suggests all the meanings quoted so far, including: "The state of being disorganized and thrown into confusion; -- said especially of an army defeated, broken in pieces, and put to flight in disorder or panic; also, the act of defeating and breaking up an army; as, the rout of the enemy was complete." Of course I spent a few minutes yesterday writing about the perils of believing dictionaries blindly (in the context of people claiming "scale mail" to be something other than an absurdity), but this one seems kosher to me. >>>> Not if it's their way home. The military pronunciation of "route" is >>>> indeed "rowt". [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >same source. >Pete MacGregor I remember Robin Dransfield, on singing 'The Rout of the Blues' at Essex University folk club (decades ago) pointing out that rout in the context of the song meant 'assembly' or similar. SignatureChris Morriss rout :- To defeat (an army, troops, a sporting team, etc) completely. Etymology: 13c: from French route, from Latin rupta a detachment To find or fetch them by searching Etymology: 16c variant of root2 - Etymology: Anglo-Saxon wrotan, from wrot snout. route :- 1. The way travelled on a regular journey. 2. A particular group of roads followed to get to a place. Etymology: 13c: from French rute, from Latin "rupta via" broken road, from rumpere to break. it sez 'ere ... http://adams.allwords.com Jim ... who lives in uk.music.folk > A rout (pronounced "rowt") could be an assembly, just as much as a > retreat. But hasn't the retreat/defeat version been more prominent in more recent years? I can only think of "assembly" usages in uk.music.folk. and similar contexts . . G. SignatureGeorge Hawes (george.hawes@orange.net) and Sawston Arts Festival > >> > << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American > >> > pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > > But only as long as it means a hasty retreat. Try looking in a decent dictionary, e.g. Chambers: <quote> route /root/ (formerly, now only /military,/ /rowt/), a way or course that is or may be traversed; marching orders; any regular journey; a regular series of calls, a round /(N Am)./ </quote> Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/tdm/ The Toro-danyo Mandala: The "Thunder-Dawn" diagram of the Universe >>>>> << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American >>>>> pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > regular series of calls, a round /(N Am)./ > </quote> Yes, but ..... Shorter Oxford (because I'm too lazy to go into another room and look it up in then full OED) : "Rout /raut/, sb 1598..... .....1. Disorderly retreat on the part of a defeated army, body of troops etc. 2. An instance of this; a complete overthrow and a flight 1611. 3. A defeated and fleeing band or army 1621." There is also a related verb with the same spelling, and several quite unconnected meanings of the same spelling. -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II web site www.mike-stevens.co.yk Old grammarians never die, they simply parse away. > >>>>> << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American > >>>>> pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > or course that is or may be traversed; marching orders; any regular > > journey; a regular series of calls, a round /(N Am)./ </quote> > Yes, but ..... > Shorter Oxford (because I'm too lazy to go into another room and look > it up in then full OED) : > "Rout /raut/, sb 1598..... .....1. Disorderly retreat on the part of > a defeated army, body of troops etc. 2. An instance of this; a > complete overthrow and a flight 1611. 3. A defeated and fleeing > band or army 1621." Yes. Your point being (given that we were discussing "route" [with an "e"] and not "rout" [without the "e"])? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/ada/09-0.htm ...the few remaining haddocks were indistinguishable from halibut. >Yes. Your point being (given that we were discussing "route" [with an >"e"] and not "rout" [without the "e"])? Now David, you can't do that. We were actually supposed to be discussing "must of" - you can't pick on one bit of thread drift and claim it is the One True Topic to the exclusion or all other bits of thread drift! SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > >Yes. Your point being (given that we were discussing "route" [with an > >"e"] and not "rout" [without the "e"])? > Now David, you can't do that. We were actually supposed to be > discussing "must of" - you can't pick on one bit of thread drift and > claim it is the One True Topic to the exclusion or all other bits of > thread drift! I wasn't doing that, as well you (should) know! Yes, the thread drifted from of/have to route/route, at which point Mike Stevens (probably correctly) surmised that Russtrim meant "rout" although writing "route". Then, foolish pedantic David stirs himself to inform the dictionarically challenged that the former and now military pronunciation of "route" is, indeed, "rowt". Dave Swindell apparently fails to accept the word of David so David perforce has to quote Chambers (1998). At this (later) point, Mike Stevens comes back to tell us what the dictionary has to say about "rout" -- and it is here that I say that we were currently attempting to clarify the pronunciation of the word "route" and not "rout" which, though so closely related, being of a common French source (and you can't get much more common than the French), are two different words in modern English (at least English of the English variety). Clear? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/penny/2d-0.htm I made one graceful sweep of the blade then rapidly placed my head in the microwave oven, closed the door and switched on. >Yes, the thread drifted from of/have to route/route, at which point >Mike Stevens (probably correctly) surmised that Russtrim meant "rout" [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Clear? I think I'm going to fetch myself a gin and tonic. SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > >Yes, the thread drifted from of/have to route/route, at which point > >Mike Stevens (probably correctly) surmised that Russtrim meant [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > > >Clear? > I think I'm going to fetch myself a gin and tonic. A great aid to understanding. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/photo/0z04-0.htm Llanberis Pass How insignificant are man's endeavours! > >Clear? > > I think I'm going to fetch myself a gin and tonic. Get one for me while you're at it! -- Mike Stevens (remembering a splendid late night on the G&T with Molly) web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk Old teachers never die, they simply lose their class. > > >>>>> << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American > > >>>>> pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > >>> > > >> But only as long as it means a hasty retreat. <snip my quoting the SOD definiton of "rout"> > Yes. Your point being (given that we were discussing "route" [with an > "e"] and not "rout" [without the "e"])? I posted as I did because I felt that the earlier postings quoted above indicated some confusion between the two words. Of course "route" and "rout" are derived from the same French original (I only just avoided saying "from the same root"), but in English they have developed different meanings nowadays as well as different pronunciations (at least in some contexts). The phrase in one of the quotes above "the route of the defeated army" can be succinctly expressed as "the route of the rout". Incidentally is the military pronunciation of "route" as "rowt" common in the UK military as well as in the US? I've not come across it here, but then I don't have many dealings with the military of either country. Incidentally I have come across in print "to rout a person out of bed" (so spelled, and I've assumed the "rowt" pronunciation) and "to root a person out of bed" (so spelled), but never "to route a person out of bed". Molly (IIRC) mentioned another meaning of "rout" to mean a vigorous party. This seems to be linked with the words "riot" and "roust" and to a (probably obsolete) meaning of "rout" as "movement". -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II web site www.mike-stevens.co.yk Old grammarians never die, they simply parse away. [Snip] > Incidentally is the military pronunciation of "route" as "rowt" > common in the UK military as well as in the US? I've not come across > it here, but then I don't have many dealings with the military of > either country. Nor do I (have dealings with the military [of any country or faction]). I do, however, have an almost daily foray into the dictionaries about me. If Chambers says "route /root/ (formerly, now only /military,/ /rowt/)", that's good enough for me. If you can't trust your dictionaries then you are forced always into seeking your own evidence for every word and usage. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/free/ Free Software: !Jigwas - JPEG merger - e pluribus unum > [Snip] > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > If you can't trust your dictionaries then you are forced always into > seeking your own evidence for every word and usage. Not being a Chambers user, and not having got round to looking it up in OED, my question becomes "How good is Chambers at distinguishing between UK & US usage?" -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II web site www.mike-stevens.co.yk Old grammarians never die, they simply parse away. > > If Chambers says "route /root/ (formerly, now only /military,/ > > /rowt/)", that's good enough for me. > > > > If you can't trust your dictionaries then you are forced always > > into seeking your own evidence for every word and usage. > Not being a Chambers user, and not having got round to looking it up > in OED, my question becomes "How good is Chambers at distinguishing > between UK & US usage?" How good is any dictionary? I trust that Chambers is reckoned one of the better dictionaries, although sometimes I do resort to a second opinion in the Shorter Oxford and, if pushed to greater detail, the great work itself. None is perfect in every respect. Chambers notes American, dialect, medical, and a host of other non standard English English (phew!) usage. Are you suggesting that in this case, Chambers, disagreeing with your experience, is wrong? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/gay/06-0.htm Now a bee cannot fly, And a fly cannot be... >> > >>>>> << >> A prime example is the increasingly common American >> > >>>>> pronunciation of "en [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >Incidentally is the military pronunciation of "route" as "rowt" common >in the UK military as well as in the US? In UK military speak "route" as a geographical path from one place to another is pronounced the French way, as "root", and a fleeing army has been "rowt"ed. SignatureDave OSOS#24 dswindell.gerbil@tcp.co.uk Remove my gerbil for email replies Yamaha XJ900S & Wessex sidecar, the sexy one Yamaha XJ900F & Watsonian Monaco, the comfortable one http://dswindell.members.beeb.net > Incidentally is the military pronunciation of "route" as "rowt" common > in the UK military as well as in the US? I've not come across it here, > but then I don't have many dealings with the military of either country. No, I have rarely heard any member of any of the UK's armed services pronouncing "route" as "rowt". I am in daily contact with the military: my PPoE has students there from the armed services of 93 different countries. The only ones I have heard to use the "rowt" pronunciation are USAians or from places that have a strong US influence, such as the Philippines. > Incidentally I have come across in print "to rout a person out of bed" > (so spelled, and I've assumed the "rowt" pronunciation) and "to root a > person out of bed" (so spelled), but never "to route a person out of > bed". I've always believed that the author is unable to spell "roust" in the first instance. > Molly (IIRC) mentioned another meaning of "rout" to mean a vigorous > party. This seems to be linked with the words "riot" and "roust" and to > a (probably obsolete) meaning of "rout" as "movement". Has anyone mentioned the other meaning of "rout": to cut a slot or similar in a piece of wood? For this, one uses a tool called a "router", which IS pronounced "rowter", even in BrEnglish. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >> Incidentally I have come across in print "to rout a person out of >> bed" (so spelled, and I've assumed the "rowt" pronunciation) and "to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I've always believed that the author is unable to spell "roust" in the > first instance. Perhaps, but if so, then it's been going on for a long time. OED traces this usage back to the 1770s. -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II web site www.mike-stevens.co.yk Old grammarians never die, they simply parse away. On Sunday, January 25, 2004 9:05 AM David <david@dacha.freeuk.com> wrote: > In article <buv03e$m3g4i$1@ID-170573.news.uni-berlin.de>, Mike Stevens > <mike.fc2@which.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Are you suggesting that in this case, Chambers, disagreeing with your > experience, is wrong? No, not at all. For a start, I made it clear that I don't *have* any significant experience of military English of any variety save that of the cinema (not necessarily a good touchstone), where the only examples I can remember of military figures pronouncing "route" in the sense of "the path to go" as "rout" have been from the US. SOD (I have the 1975 edition) says "in military use and in US still pronounced rout", which agrees with Chambers. Dave Swindell's posting says that UK military people don't use this pronunciation, which tallies with what I hear in UK civilian use. The full OED (I use the 2002 CD edition) doesn't even mention the "rowt" pronunciation of "route". So there is plenty of scope for confusion. Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk Me cogitare credo, ergo me esse credo. (Rainy Day Carts) [Big Snip] > So there is plenty of scope for confusion. Agreed. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/zodiac/2tau-0.htm Taurus (April 21st - May 21st) Vrishabha - the Bull Hathor > No, I have rarely heard any member of any of the UK's armed services s/rarely/never/ I *think* that I'd been going to refer to other armed forces apart from UKian ones when I commenced writing that sentence, and didn't spot the inconsistency before posting. > pronouncing "route" as "rowt". I am in daily contact with the military: > my PPoE has students there from the armed services of 93 different > countries. The only ones I have heard to use the "rowt" pronunciation > are USAians or from places that have a strong US influence, such as the > Philippines. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 ><< >> A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >>> route" as "enn rowt". >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >say "root" when I speak of the quickest route to town, and "rowt" when I speak >of the route of the defeated army. As far as we right-pondians are concerned, that's the way it is too. SignatureDave OSOS#24 dswindell.gerbil@tcp.co.uk Remove my gerbil for email replies Yamaha XJ900S & Wessex sidecar, the sexy one Yamaha XJ900F & Watsonian Monaco, the comfortable one http://dswindell.members.beeb.net >A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they >honestly believe that it should be pronounced like it is spellt. This might be partially corrected by a spelling I saw recently: "on route". It was either US or British, but I don't recall which. SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) >>A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >>route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >It was either US or British, but I don't recall which. The Americans would still pronounce route as rout, though. They think our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the Australians, although for a different reason. SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > The Americans would still pronounce route as rout, though. They think > our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the > Australians, although for a different reason. The Australians find our pronunciation funny? Hmm.. (at least we don't make all nouns end in "eeee") ----------- GC >> The Americans would still pronounce route as rout, though. They think >> our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the >> Australians, although for a different reason. > >The Australians find our pronunciation funny? Hmm.. (at least we don't make all >nouns end in "eeee") The Australians use root as a "four-letter-word" - as a dictionary says: "have sexual intercourse with". SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) > > The Americans would still pronounce route as rout, though. They think > > our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the > > Australians, although for a different reason. > > The Australians find our pronunciation funny? Hmm.. (at least we don't make all > nouns end in "eeee") "Rooting" has a sexual connotation in Oz; there was a recent suggestion that the current non-fiction best-seller's title should have been "Eats, roots, shoots and leaves". SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >>>The Americans would still pronounce route as rout, though. They think >>>our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > that the current non-fiction best-seller's title should have been "Eats, > roots, shoots and leaves". As per the Ozzy '70s tee shirt, which had to be explained to me at the time. On the front was "I'm a member of the Wombat Club." On the back was the phrase above, but without the first comma. > As per the Ozzy '70s tee shirt, which had to be explained to me at the > time. On the front was "I'm a member of the Wombat Club." On the back > was the phrase above, but without the first comma. The one I saw in the Seventies was worn by a New Zealander mate of mine and had "I'm a Kiwi" (with cartoon drawing) on the front, and "Eats, Roots, Shoots and Leaves" on the back. His other T-shirt had "I'm a Mountain Man, I like mountin' women". (Oh how we laughed! Once, I think.) :O) Gilbert >> > The Americans would still pronounce route as rout, though. They think >> > our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >that the current non-fiction best-seller's title should have been "Eats, >roots, shoots and leaves". Incidentally, I've not noticed anything by Lynne Truss in The Times since the book was published. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >>>A prime example is the increasingly common American pronunciation of "en >>>route" as "enn rowt". I call it "misplaced literacy", because they [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >our (well, actually the French) pronunciation rather amusing. So do the >Australians, although for a different reason. A year or so ago there was a discussion on the American pronunciation(s) of route on another newsgroup. I can't recall how long the discussion lasted, but it was at least two days. One evening in the middle of it I was flicking through channels on the TV and saw a minute or so of an American movie in which two characters were discussing what route to take. One consistently used the "root" pronunciation, and the other used "rowt". It was not a recent movie. SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) >Molly Mockford >I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that >lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! The purple lobster that lives in the boot of my car agrees with your goblin. It suggests that you buy a bicycle, become "Bicycle Repairwoman" and meet lots of interesting, stranded cyclists. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.