Forum Lingo

[Albion]

Most of these alleged Americanisms are just poor grammar or spelling and mark the person using them as poorly educated, that's all.

 

[Landon Caeli]

American English has a unique idiom and it’s often obvious, just from the written words, that a poster is American.

As an American you may not be aware of some of these distinctive differences. The following Americanisms crop up regularly in CF posts:

Of
Sticking ‘of” into places where it’s semantically superfluous is a fairly standard Americanism. Where the rest of us might say “Get off my back”, an American will say “Get off of my back”. Sentences like, “It’s not that big of a deal”, are also typically American. A non-American might drop the ‘of’ and say “It’s not that big a deal”, but, since this version is bit awkward, is more likely to do a complete substitution with something like “It isn’t that important”

"if this is too abstract of a question then…"

Would
“If he would have known he wouldn’t have come” is an Americanised version of “If he had known he wouldn’t have come”. Technically ‘would’ adds an unnecessary, conditional element to ‘have’. It seems to be most prevalent in informal, vernacular American.

Second of all
Most other Englishes tend to use ‘secondly’ where American English seems to favour ‘second of all’. This is either derived from “first of all” or is yet another opportunity to work ‘of’ into a sentence.

Different than
In American English ‘different than’, is the most common way to express differentiation. American English seems to rarely use ‘different to’ or ‘different from’; the forms of differentiation most commonly used in other English dialects.

‘Then’ vs ‘than’
CF posters regularly confuse ‘then’ with ‘than’. It seems to be a habit peculiar to American posters. Typically, ‘then’ is used when the correct word is ‘than’. The most common form of this is when ‘different than’ (mentioned above) becomes ‘different then’ although I have often seen then/than confusion in other contexts. Surprisingly, the then/than mix-up is even a problem for some of the more articulate CF posters.

Dropping the ‘d’
Dropping the final 'd' on 'suppose(d)' and 'bias(ed)' is a very common Americanism
"He is suppose to help us"
"She is bias against Asians"

Anyways
Pluralising anyway to anyways is a peculiarly American habit.

Time & number
A quarter of three vs A quarter to three

Two hundred forty-seven vs Two hundred and forty-seven

Convicted
In my English 'convicted' means found guilty of a crime. Using 'convicted' to mean 'strongly convinced' appears to be peculiar to American Christians.

On
Study on it, preach on the Bible. This use of 'on' is peculiarly American.

I could care less
Notoriously the equivalent of Fingernails on a Blackboard for most non-American English speakers. We would say "I couldn't care less".

OB

That's amazing. I always wondered how American English is perceived by others.

 

[Occams Barber]

That's amazing. I always wondered how American English is perceived by others.

When you think about it, America was the first major English speaking colony. That means it's had 400+ years for the language to wander off in its own direction. At the same time, the English spoken in Britain also continued to evolve in its own separate way. Given this linguistic split and separate evolution, I'm surprised that American English and British English are (arguably ) still mutually intelligible.

Contrast this with Australia settled 230+ years ago. It's version of English is much closer to British English, in spite of its remoteness, than is the American version.

OB

 

[Sketcher]

I would also normally use 'conviction' to mean strong belief. The difference I'm talking about is the use of 'convicted' as a word derived from 'conviction'.

While most English speakers would describe themselves as 'having a personal conviction' few, outside of the US, would describe themselves as being 'convicted'. As you said, it appears most often in the context of a Christian belief.

OB

When we use the term a lot, we abbreviate it when we can.

 

[Occams Barber]

Most of these alleged Americanisms are just poor grammar or spelling and mark the person using them as poorly educated, that's all.

I disagree. While there are a couple of instances where spelling is a problem (then/than, d dropping), most of the list I added to the thread are instances of idiomatic difference. Most would qualify as acceptable within standard American and be regularly used by journalists and TV commentators. The worst offender is probably 'would' which may fall beyond the bounds of standardised American English.

Even if one or two fall outside the arbitrary definition of 'standard' this doesn't need to indicate 'poor education'. Idioms are cultural. They aren't wrong or right or better or worse. Surprisingly it's entirely possible to be a PhD in Brain Surgery while speaking with a Southern idiom... y'all.

OB

 

[Occams Barber]

When we use the term a lot, we abbreviate it when we can.

I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with using 'convicted' in this way. For me it's just one of the fascinating linguistic changes which define a country and a culture.

By the way we - Australians - are notorious for abbreviating words. Its seems to be the first thing American tourists notice - apart from the dangerously low level of the water in our toilets.

OB

 

[Sketcher]

I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with using 'convicted' in this way. For me it's just one of the fascinating linguistic changes which define a country and a culture.

By the way we - Australians - are notorious for abbreviating words. Its seems to be the first thing American tourists notice - apart from the dangerously low level of the water in our toilets.

OB

Hmm. Y'all may not want me to visit.

 

[Occams Barber]

Hmm. Y'all may not want me to visit.

You are most welcome to visit. Just be aware that when you first use Australian sanitary facilities there may be a longer delay between launch and splash down than you are used to.

My brother, who lives in the US, often talks fondly about the first time he encountered an American toilet bowl. Apart from the fear of drowning, he had to check to make sure he wasn't about to relieve himself in the spa bath.

OB
An Aussie Kid Perspective of the American Toilet (kidbucketlist.com.au)

 

[Albion]

I disagree. While there are a couple of instances where spelling is a problem (then/than, d dropping), most of the list I added to the thread are instances of idiomatic difference. Most would qualify as acceptable within standard American and be regularly used by journalists and TV commentators. The worst offender is probably 'would' which may fall beyond the bounds of standardised American English.

Oh sure. It's a mixed bag. Some are colloquialisms, but simple misspellings and mistaken usage is not a regional characteristic when the rest of the population in the same geographical area knows to write "biased" instead of "bias" for instance (to cite one example we were given).