Planetarion Forums

pig · 2 May 2005, 16:04

This thread is started after I was negrepped several times for my post in enola gay thread. Where I refered to "9/11" as "11/9"

Firstly Im British, why fall down to american attitudes and lazyness again, its 11/9 in Britain not 9/11.

Secondly I have been heavily influenced by my lecturer in American Politics who prefers to call September 11th, "11/9". As he feels that Culture in Britain is already being changed constantly by American ideas and way of thinking, why let them takeover further with changing our date system.

Thirdly its rather funny how all the anti american board posters fall into the trap of becoming more americanised and refering to September 11th as 9/11 when they themselves are criticising American Globalisation.

Finally what are your thoughts on this.

2 May 2005, 16:06

Aluminum

Kurashima · 2 May 2005, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman

Aluminum

Clownshoe.

Lupin · 2 May 2005, 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by pig

This thread is started after I was negrepped several times

you are bored or just care too much.

that is my thought.

Tactitus · 2 May 2005, 16:15

You can say/write it any way you like.

JonnyBGood · 2 May 2005, 16:20

9/11 has practically become a proper noun over the past few years so I always refer to it as "9/11". Why be needlessly pedantic just to assert your independence?

Cannon_Fodder · 2 May 2005, 16:29

colour
galvanise

btw: Agree completely with the 'americanism' of things nowadays...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to pig again.

MrL_JaKiri · 2 May 2005, 16:36

It's not a date, it's an incident. As J says, it's almost become a proper noun.

Marilyn Manson · 2 May 2005, 16:37

Americanisms have enriched the English language beyond measure.

MrL_JaKiri · 2 May 2005, 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Americanisms have enriched the English language beyond measure.

Transportation!

Kurashima · 2 May 2005, 16:39

New Clear.

Baron Morte · 2 May 2005, 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

9/11 has practically become a proper noun over the past few years so I always refer to it as "9/11". Why be needlessly pedantic just to assert your independence?

Why be needlessly subservient just to look "not pedantic"?

JonnyBGood · 2 May 2005, 16:59

I'm not changing anything about myself. This event happened and it became known as 9/11. That's what I call it. Language evolves man.

Proteus · 2 May 2005, 17:56

I normally just call it "the 11th of September". I'd never say "9/11".

But neg-repping you for saying "11/9" is stupid. Some compensatory pos-rep is heading your way.

DukePaul · 2 May 2005, 17:59

No one actually neg repped him for it, he only sees a chance go gain more pos rep

All Systems Go · 2 May 2005, 19:41

It's all so clear now! September 11th 2001 was an Imperialist conspiracy to get the world to convert to their date-stamp.

Bastards!

Marilyn Manson · 2 May 2005, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by idimmu

the date it took place on is the 11/9

This is cultural Fascism. I use the Julian Calendar, and for me the date it took place on was 2452164.28459. I therefore demand that all other people in the world desist from using 9/11 and start using my dating which is much better and has nothing to do with America or George Bush or WMD's or the occupation of Iraq.

Androme · 2 May 2005, 19:52

With that said, if it happened it on the 9th September instead, people would not have a problem.

Rikard · 2 May 2005, 20:25

Defence

MrL_JaKiri · 2 May 2005, 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by big_horn

i bet nostradamus accounted for either one :/

Yeah, he moved his assets out of stocks and bonds and in to land and gold reserves a few days before the attacks.

Another Slayer · 2 May 2005, 21:09

unless he gets busted for insider trading. /o\

2 May 2005, 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurashima

Clownshoe.

Camel Toe

queball · 3 May 2005, 12:49

I agree with JBG that (/11 is a proper noun.

H1TMANish · 3 May 2005, 12:56

English is a mis-mosh of several languages anyway, and has been changing since those dastardly romans. I see little reason for that to be different now.

zakoff · 3 May 2005, 13:56

i hadn't realised that until now to be honest. I can never remember which number the month is.

americanisms should be taken out of the language too! But so should Chav and the many other non-traditional accents in the UK!

Korach · 3 May 2005, 13:57

9/11 has basically become the name of the event that occured on 11 September 2001. If you refer to something else that took place on that date, I still think one should use 11/9, but I don't see the big deal in calling the terrorist attacks "9/11".

MrL_JaKiri · 3 May 2005, 14:04

I think the whole thing shows up the americans' supreme lack of imagination. First significant terrorist attack on the US, you'd think they'd been saving up some special nouns for a day like that. "The Peterloo Massacre", "Bloody Sunday", but somehow BIGGER AND BETTER, for is that not the American Dream, that a man should be free to die in a spectacular and iconic disaster, and then it be called something dramatic?

Calling it exclusively by the date seems so much of a copout.

Tactitus · 3 May 2005, 14:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

I think the whole thing shows up the americans' supreme lack of imagination. First significant terrorist attack on the US, you'd think they'd been saving up some special nouns for a day like that. "The Peterloo Massacre", "Bloody Sunday", but somehow BIGGER AND BETTER, for is that not the American Dream, that a man should be free to die in a spectacular and iconic disaster, and then it be called something dramatic?

Calling it exclusively by the date seems so much of a copout.

I'd rather we never master the 'art' of naming massacres. :|

MrL_JaKiri · 3 May 2005, 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tactitus

I'd rather we never master the 'art' of naming massacres. :|

Be that as it may, it still seems like you've farmed it out to someone with no imagination. Just think of the boost you could have given young disaster namers in the US with some evidence that the young genius, or experienced amateur, can make it big in the field?

Tactitus · 3 May 2005, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Be that as it may, it still seems like you've farmed it out to someone with no imagination. Just think of the boost you could have given young disaster namers in the US with some evidence that the young genius, or experienced amateur, can make it big in the field?

Perhaps we should outsource it to you folks?

lokken · 3 May 2005, 15:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman

Aluminum

Wasn't he dropped for Jens Lehmann a while back?

MrL_JaKiri · 3 May 2005, 17:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Perhaps we should outsource it to you folks?

No, the government keeps on farming that kind of thing out to companies who put shoddy work in and keep on getting contracts, for some reason.

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 17:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Has there ever been any studies on how the difference between the Brtitish and the Amreicans in terms of the use and graps of the English language?

I have no idea. This isn't my area of expertise. What I can say is that the differences between American English and British English are often exgerated, particularly by the British, and the idea that American English will be the death of us is plain bollocks. We wouldn't be able to function without the words the Americans have introduced to the language. Most Britons have no idea of how many words were coined in America that they use in everyay speech, and which they simply couldn't do without.

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 17:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Examples?

I'm in Drill Hall and I haven't got my briefcase with me atm. I'll post a list later when I retire to my apartments.

roadrunner_0 · 3 May 2005, 17:59

we could quite easily live without 'americanisms' as the language would still have continued to grow without their input

what confuses me though is why they change things?

why have your date month/day/year as opposed to day/month/year? surely a more intuative approach to dating?

why change the spelling of words? aluminium has that I, why take it out? etc

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

as the language would still have continued to grow without their input

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

what confuses me though is why they change things?

So you want the language to evolve, just so long as it isn't done by Americans? Did I read those two sections correctly?

roadrunner_0 · 3 May 2005, 18:07

no, i want the language to grow, however, changing the spelling of words for your own purposes isnt the language growing, its just mis-spelling things

and i do wish that people on these boards wouldn't quote out of context quite so much

EDIT: just so this post isnt misconstrued, the additions of words to language is how it grows, not changing the spelling of words, otherwise im sure that the OED would get very upset

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

no, i want the language to grow, however, changing the spelling of words for your own purposes isnt the language growing, its just mis-spelling things

Why does it matter? It's takes a certain degree of pettyness and irrationality to favour 'colour' over 'color.' Even if there was a chance Britons would abandon the use of 'colour', which there isn't any signs of them doing.

roadrunner_0 · 3 May 2005, 18:13

yes, but color simply isn't right i'm not particularly a language purist or anything, i just assume that there must have originally been a reason other than sheer laziness for changing the spelling of these words

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 18:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

i just assume that there must have originally been a reason other than sheer laziness for changing the spelling of these words

There isn't really any reason for any word to be as it is. Words are just formed the way they are by pure chance, through mongrelisations, through the dropping of letters, additions from other languages, misunderstandings, etc. If this wasn't the case then we'd still all be speaking like the Wife of Bath.

roadrunner_0 · 3 May 2005, 18:18

so they did it cos they were lazy ignorant semi literate ****tards then?

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

so they did it cos they were lazy ignorant semi literate ****tards then?

There has to be a balance between a standardised English and sufficent room for it to grow and change. If people want to start dropping totally uneccesary letters from words, then I don't see what the problem is. You still haven't presented an argument other than 'This is the right spelling because it is and it should be' Changes in words happen in every language, and it's occurance in English certainly pre-dates Americans.

If we can still understand the word, and it is still recognisable by us, then I don't see any problems.

roadrunner_0 · 3 May 2005, 18:48

ok, i will give you that for now, as i won't have time to construct a good counter argument until tomorrow, however, what about the date thing?

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 18:55

I don't see the problem with the date. Like people have said, the event has been called 9/11 - That doesn't mean that anyone is forcing us to use that sytem of dating, it's just what the event has been grown to be called. It takes a certain amount of interesting paranoia and stupidity to insist on calling in 11/9.

roadrunner_0 · 3 May 2005, 18:59

i didnt mean that date silly, i meant their dating system in general

Marilyn Manson · 3 May 2005, 19:00

Like I said, I don't have a problem with it.

Tactitus · 3 May 2005, 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

yes, but color simply isn't right i'm not particularly a language purist or anything, i just assume that there must have originally been a reason other than sheer laziness for changing the spelling of these words

And is it sheer laziness which prevents you from looking up that reason? (hint: google on Noah Webster).

Quote:

the additions of words to language is how it grows, not changing the spelling of words, otherwise im sure that the OED would get very upset

The problem is that pronunciation evolves as well as language, so if you want to maintain any sort of phonetic spelling then spelling has to evolve too (it's probably a lost cause for English in that regard, but who knows).

With respect to dates, I prefer the ISO 8601 standard: YYYY-MM-DD.

All Systems Go · 3 May 2005, 19:00

But WHY is it 9/11 in the first place? Where is the logic of putting the month before the day? It's all good and well saying noone is forcing us to use it but why are they using it? It makes no sense to me. It's out of order.

Proteus · 3 May 2005, 19:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tactitus

The problem is that pronunciation evolves as well as language, so if you want to maintain any sort of phonetic spelling then spelling has to evolve too (it's probably a lost cause for English in that regard, but who knows).

If you want any sort of phonetic spelling then English isn't the language for you, and hasn't been for a very long time.

Tactitus · 3 May 2005, 19:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

But WHY is it 9/11 in the first place? Where is the logic of putting the month before the day? It's all good and well saying noone is forcing us to use it but why are they using it? It makes no sense to me. It's out of order.

I think the answer is simply that Americans write it the way we say it. We generally* say "September eleventh" so we write it 9/11.

*Sometimes we put the day first when speaking, e.g., 'fourth of July,' but usually only for special dates.