The End of the "Aerodrome"

Indeed.:)

I just believe the English education system should teach English children native English.

I quite agree.

And if I were not native English and married to a non-native speaker, I am sure I might take a more relaxed view.

It’s also hard to get wound up about the purity of Strine! 😀

That probably rounds it up quite neatly. There are different “Englishes”, which I accept. I just believe the English education system should teach English children native English. And if I were not native English and married to a non-native speaker, I am sure I might take a more relaxed view.

– at least it appeared so but the language had little to do with the English I am familiar with.

And that’s the nub of the problem with the discomfort in Britain over English. There’s a belief that English is in some way ‘owned’ in those Islands, and the local version/s are to be aspired to. It’s a gift, but like most gifts, the giver may not like what the recipient does with it!

It’s not ‘Britain’s’ English now – and as I said earlier in another thread, the global English-as-a-second language (much as you might regard it as second rate) is going to be the pre-eminent one for the world in the 21st century as a tool, it does.

Meanwhile here’s a couple of takes on the perennial American vs British English. As an Australian married to a Canadian, I take a relaxed, entertained (but not bothered) view on this one.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/14130942

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14285853

Regards,

If you are talking about the English language as being a lingua franca as a method of widely understood communicaton then of course you are right. I was the onlooker at a factory in the UK watching a Japanese engineeer and his Italian counterpart trying to make a machine work. Interesting and amusing and they knew what they were doing – at least it appeared so but the language had little to do with the English I am familiar with.

And that is part of the problem. The internet provides everyone, including native English speakers with a sort of global argot English so that native English speakers end up speaking like my Japanese and Italian engineers, with more than a hint of American thrown in.

Broad agreement? Maybe – but I thnk we diverge on a number of specifics.

You don’t know what you are missing. There is a thread running currently about the colour of canine faeces!!:D

Spread your wings and come and visit us in GD – there are some good debates to be had!:)

Best avoided, tried it, don’t like it much!

Agree with above, there are no charabancs in use so how can we use the word unless it is just nickname/slang or incorrect usage applied to something else – not good enough reasons to keep the word in the dictionary.

>>I guess many decades ago there were men stood around tutting in an English pub about how people had begun calling motorised charabancs “coaches”, confusing them with the horsedrawn contraptions of their youth…<<

Nice thought, but that’s not what would have happened.

Early motorised coaches were called motor-coaches, to make that very distinction. Eventually the motor- prefix was lost as it became superfluous, and horse-drawn coaches faded from memory.

A motor-coach is a different type of vehicle to a charabanc, which is essentially a large car with bench seats, accessible via individual doors for each row.

You’d really only use charabanc if you encountered an actual charabanc!

Tower of Babel? Not here, not yet. Of course English is working well enough. That’s unarguable. Language stands or falls on comprehension at both ends of the conversation; and the individual’s corrective mechanism is working as well for English as it ever has.

You or I can hold an effective conversation with more people in English in more places in the world than at any time in history (or as we are between Australia and the UK here) – that’s a concrete measure of broadening and this English’s success, much more important than knowing when to use ‘who’ or ‘whom’.

On an everyday basis, everyone using English (now, and then) manages to a standard that is (at a minimum) good enough for their communication needs, and better for some like us, who are interested in it for itself. The past wasn’t ‘better’ – don’t let’s kid ourselves that the few who got ‘a good education’ are the measure of the vast majority who didn’t get a chance and whose English was never good enough to crack the class-system of the Empire. The problem in Britain is the decline of an ex- centre of Empire, not just language or education alone – those, like the failing NHS, high street, and lack of cash are symptoms, not the cause.

Meanwhile, anyone who wants to get really good at language is able to do so, without paying for a Grammar school or private education, at the lower cost of an internet connection etc. or access to a library. The measure of how you talk or use English as a measure of which box to put someone in is mostly gone, and good riddance. I don’t particularly like Jamie Oliver, but I’ll fight for his right to parochial English and the diversity that shows.

Outside the UK, in non-English-speaking countries, people are fighting to learn a flat, effective international English, as it’s starting to be the thing that makes the world go around, rather than the quibbles over fondly remembered anachronisms or now-parochial national preferences

I don’t agree that education is owned by the modern education systems, but by the choices of each individual to learn or not, from wherever they need. It is easier than ever to find authoritative data on anything you can think of, and critically the petty Hitler gatekeepers of yore can easily be circumnavigated if you want to.

But yes, I think we’re in broad agreement, just watch for the men-of-a-certain age rumbles of “it were better afore…”

GD? No thanks. I’ll stick to the more refined OT that happens here occasionally.

Regards,

“Point is ultimately English is working well enough” – we will agree to differ about that.

The quality of teaching is surely all about enabling children to leave school totally proficient in reading, writing and numeracy as the basic requirements. If they cannot then either they or the systerm or both has failed. And then we need to find out why. We might disagree about why.

Spread your wings and come and visit us in GD – there are some good debates to be had!:)

Your analogy of the tool-box is an interesting one and I suppose I would argue that there is far more mallet work these days than perhaps a decade or two ago, although I have no evidence to support the feeling.

Depends whether you are looking at numbers (yes) or percentages of English speakers in the rapidly growing community (probably not). Point is ultimately English is working well enough, as it has, and is the pre-eminent language globally – formally (such as in international ATC) and in most other areas.

Just think if it were French with the Canutian ‘Académie française trying to tell everyone ‘what’s correct’ in denial of actual use!

And I would disagree with your point about grammar school certainties. They were a plank on which we built the way we spoke and wrote. The result is sloppy speech and sloppy writing, both of which should be avoidable. And this has nothing to do with regional characteristics but simply the ability of everyone above the age of 14 to write and speak coherently.

Maybe – I’d suggest the issue – sorry, problem :p is quality of education, rather than a need to return to overly-prescriptive and rigid teaching based on false criteria.

The university admission boards have been highly critical of the quality of the texts they receive,m as have employers, so I have no doubt that standards have fallen.

That’s a very good point, and I absolutely agree – IMHO (and who’s asking me?) shows a need for some rote learning of basic facts in primary and secondary education; but not a return to nothing but!

This should really be in GD, shouldn’t it…..??

Yup! But I don’t go there.

Alan – My understanding that an airport has to have some customs facility (and is civil, as well).

Regards,

Going back to my ATC cadet days :rolleyes:

I always understood that an Airport was for civil aircraft
An Aerodrome was for military aircraft
An airfield was used by either, but had no fixed buildings.

Yes, I would agree with your last paragraph, but would identify it as a problem, not an issue.;)

Your analogy of the tool-box is an interesting one and I suppose I would argue that there is far more mallet work these days than perhaps a decade or two ago, although I have no evidence to support the feeling.

And I would disagree with your point about grammar school certainties. They were a plank on which we built the way we spoke and wrote. The result is sloppy speech and sloppy writing, both of which should be avoidable. And this has nothing to do with regional characteristics but simply the ability of everyone above the age of 14 to write and speak coherently.

The university admission boards have been highly critical of the quality of the texts they receive,m as have employers, so I have no doubt that standards have fallen.

This should really be in GD, shouldn’t it…..??

English is rich in words which have many shades of meaning and circumstances for which there are different words with subtle differences in their meanings. I think that much of this richness of the language is becoming lost. I see it on a daily basis through my son and his family and friends and my grandson, who happily, rather enjoys learning words he seldom encounters, except when he is with us.

I do regret that the teaching of English language, as we knew it, its grammar and syntax, seems to be dying out.

Interesting points. I absolutely agree about the delicate subtlety of the language, and it’s something I find endlessly fascinating. However to use a relevant comparison, if English is a tool set, most people aren’t able to understand any tools above a hammer and saw, nor use them ‘safely’, yet we rely on a relatively small cadre of those qualified to do the more delicate work in machinery and in language.

Among those experts are those who learn the arcane arts of restoring and maintaining warbirds and vintage aircraft, their work is there for all to admire, and though they are few, there seems to be enough to carry the torch (a comparison brought to mind by ZRX’s comments on WIX regarding those who can do and explain it – a rare combination.)

Few could fly like Ray Hanna, or build like I K Brunel, or write like Robert Hughes, but many more can appreciate these achievements and some of us are inspired to follow – however poorly – in their trail.

I also agree that it seems as though the language is in decline, but actually I don’t think that’s the case at all. We must remember among all the old ‘certainties’ of Grammar School rote learning was an awful lot of rigid rubbish; staring with ‘the three Rs’ (which weren’t) ‘i before e except after c’ which isn’t a rule, and the ludicrous attempt to fit English to Latin rules. Meanwhile there’s as much interest in playing with and exploring language ‘on the streets’ which is where it’s always developed, and less hierarchical rule setting by some self-appointed elites than for centuries.

You can use language like your tools, delicately and precisely, or like a mallet. Most of the time most people lack finesse, it’s not a new thing. But any group will play with language, and if you look at the tricks, twists and innovations without bringing some pre-certainties to it, it is remarkable. From a rap song about the B-24 (I found awful, but funny and clever) to the endless one-trick joke of the two RAF officers talking chav, there’s even relevant developments. Military (and technical) language is evolving jargon, and pushing langage forward, although it might feel like backwards at times!

On the other hand there’s clear evidence of a lack of commitment by publishers to standards – in some cases any standards – of proofing material. Marketing is an easy punchbag, but it’s interesting how rarely a marketing conversation centres around the actual quality or merit of the product.

Also the comprehension and concentration abilities of the averagely educated person are a matter of despair at times, and seen here on the forum all-too-often.

The issue (where we’d agree I think) is the cult of not caring about trying to achieve good results, a focus on huge results for no care, work or understanding – seeing celebrity as aspirational and any form of knowledge and understanding as ‘geeky’. Therin might lie the failure of the west, and the difference between ‘airplane’ and ‘aeroplane’ will be the least of our worries!

I wonder how many 15 year olds could parse a sentence.

http://www.link.cs.cmu.edu/link/submit-sentence-4.html 😮

[Well, there’s some on topic-forum stuff in there!]
Cheers,

I wonder how many 15 year olds could parse a sentence.

Most couldn’t parse a decent……. 😮

Innit, like-no-wot-I-meen, wotevaaaaaaaaa

Thanks Kev!

Sharra is still in common oral usage in the Black Country and particularly among those of my age and above and perhaps those who are unprepared to let the dialect die.

Good for you, and maybe a letter to Collins is in order! They do like to hear from other people than the usual Telegraph Colonels.

One of the great things about the UK is the huge diversity of accent and dialect, particularly in such a small area, compared to other English users.

Regards,

And just to bring the thread back to its original discussion of the term aerodrome, Halfpenny Green always was and always will, to me, be aerodrome or airfield, even though it now goes by the ridiculous name of Wolverhampton Intergalactic Business Spaceport or some such.

Regards,

kev35

JDK – you needn’t…

Oops, too late! :rolleyes:

JDK – you needn’t, because you have stated the case very clearly.

I have now read your reply to my post. I agree but the only point I would make is where the change in the language makes for less ease of understanding by changing the meaning of a word or words. English is rich in words which have many shades of meaning and circumstances for which there are different words with subtle differences in their meanings. I think that much of this richness of the language is becoming lost. I see it on a daily basis through my son and his family and friends and my grandson, who happily, rather enjoys learning words he seldom encounters, except when he is with us.

I do regret that the teaching of English language, as we knew it, its grammar and syntax, seems to be dying out. I wonder how many 15 year olds could parse a sentence.

JDK – happily you do not have to be an ex-pat to enjoy the words and phrases used when you were younger rather than the current argot.

Indeed. However shocking though it may be, your (and my) English has changed to fit the current ‘argot’ in ways you won’t have noticed. (A similar test is meeting up with a group you were in, but separated from for years – the terms and catch phrases that were current then re-surface in that review, but aren’t current for any one of the group.)

An expatriate’s native language is a form of fossil*, and will change, but in lesser and different ways to that of their contemporaries ‘back home’. My parent’s Australian English was stuck in the ’60s while they lived in the UK, and was regarded as quaint to their contemporaries NOT only the younger generation, on their return decades later.

With the increased instant international communication, that effect is certainly declining, and that is a loss of diversity and interest I’m sorry to see lost.

I’m unconvinced that any version of English is superior to all others, although most are appropriate within their domains – it is, after all a working tool, democratically modified and directed by the users. The fact we can, to a degree, cherrypick terms from around the groups is a good thing, IMHO.

*That’s AA’s English is a fossil, not AA! 😀

James.

Sharra is still in common oral usage in the Black Country and particularly among those of my age and above and perhaps those who are unprepared to let the dialect die. You do see it written in both articles and by correspondents in publications like the Black Country Bugle and I think I may have seen and heard it used by Professor Carl Chinn.

When I was growing up in the sixties and seventies we had many coach trips but it was always the ‘sharra.’

“Weerst thee gooin this early on a mornin’?”

“We’m gooin ter Rhyl on the sharra.”

But a sharra was always a coach and never a bus.

I’m sure there are other Black Country writers who use archaic, dialect terms, both in historical stories and in newspaper articles. But never, ever think that Tim Spall’s accent in Auf Wiedersehn Pet is anything other than a poor parody of either the Birmingham or Black Country accents.

Regards,

kev35