On 6 Oct, 11:36, Graham P Davis wrote:
Jonathan Stott wrote:
Dave Cornwell wrote:
I can't think how to relate this to the weather other than we all listen
to BBC presenters. I find it annoying to hear expressions such as "Gordon
Brown may be accused of bottling it if he doesn't call an election". It's
the use of "bottling it" I object to. Shouldn't it be "having second
thoughts" or "becoming apprehensive". Come to that it's like the frequent
press use of the trivialising new verb "to glass" someone". Shouldn't
that be "thrust a broken glass into someone's face maiming them for
life". Am I becoming a snob or a grumpy old man? Probably, yes!!

What's wrong with new words when they succinctly convey their meaning?
One of the great things about the English language is the way it evolves
so organically.

In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

Martin


--
Graham P Davis
Bracknell, Berks., UK
Send e-mails to "newsman" as mails to "newsboy" are ignored.

In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

The only thing I can find wrong with that is that they have spelt 'rased'
with a 'z'.

In the last decade or so it has become more common to use the 's' instead of
the 'z' in words such as rased (both are correct) to distinguish British
English from American English, the latter always use 'z'.
________________
Nick G
Otter Valley, Devon
83 m amsl
http://www.ottervalley.co.uk

Nick Gardner wrote:
In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

The only thing I can find wrong with that is that they have spelt 'rased'
with a 'z'.


That being the favoured and current spelling in the OED, which quotes 'razed to
the ground' as an example of usage.
http://dictionary.oed.com/


In the last decade or so it has become more common to use the 's' instead of
the 'z' in words such as rased (both are correct) to distinguish British
English from American English, the latter always use 'z'.

'rase' in this context appears to have fallen into disuse a couple of hundred
years ago.
"5. To demolish, to level with the ground; to RAZE. Now rare. Also with up."
(same source)


--
Gianna

http://www.buchan-meteo.org.uk
* * * * * * *

In message , Dave
Cornwell writes

"Anne Burgess" wrote in message
...
I find it annoying to hear expressions such as "Gordon Brown may be
accused of bottling it if he doesn't call an election". It's the use of
"bottling it" I object to. Shouldn't it be "having second thoughts" or
"becoming apprehensive". Come to that it's like the frequent press use of
the trivialising new verb "to glass" someone". Shouldn't that be "thrust
a broken glass into someone's face maiming them for life". Am I becoming
a snob or a grumpy old man? Probably, yes!!
Dave

Are you sure that it wasn't a mispronunciation of 'bottling out'? I'd have
less of a problem with that than with 'bottling it'. My dictionary says
that the verb 'bottle' is transitive and means to put something in a
bottle.

Anne ------------------
You're all probably right - and I feel better now ;-) Nevertheless I still
object to phrases like "glassing" someone being banded about as though it
was like slapping someone in the face, which seems to be the case for my
local newsspaper.




FWIW, English may be regarded as a family of languages in a constant
state of evolution. I wince at 'different to' and 'bored of' and 'so,
like', but my wincing isn't going to affect the outcome.

What I do relish is that speech Radio Four seems on the whole to be
better pronounced and more articulate than the televised version.








--
Peter Thomas

On Oct 6, 11:10 am, Jonathan Stott wrote:
Dave Cornwell wrote:
I can't think how to relate this to the weather other than we all listen to
BBC presenters. I find it annoying to hear expressions such as "Gordon Brown
may be accused of bottling it if he doesn't call an election". It's the use
of "bottling it" I object to. Shouldn't it be "having second thoughts" or
"becoming apprehensive". Come to that it's like the frequent press use of
the trivialising new verb "to glass" someone". Shouldn't that be "thrust a
broken glass into someone's face maiming them for life". Am I becoming a
snob or a grumpy old man? Probably, yes!!

What's wrong with new words when they succinctly convey their meaning?
One of the great things about the English language is the way it evolves
so organically.

--
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather:http://www.canterburyweather.co.uk/
Reverse my e-mail address to reply by e-mail

The problem here is not the words themselves, which are
quite graphic, but the fact that they are colloquialisms and therefore
inappropriate at certain times, just as the first and only rule of
effing and blinding is knowing when not to.
I shouldn't get too starry-eyed about the evolution of
English. Much of it is due to misunderstanding and misuse by the
uneducated, resulting in words changing their meaning. Quite often
this doesn't matter but sometimes it does, for example with "alibi",
until recently meaning specifically "elsewhere" but now can mean any
old excuse. Another one from our own field is "haze", now apparently
Ci or light Sc as opposed to suspended smoke or dust particles. This
one, unbelievably, was initiated by those dimwits at BBC Weather and
seems to be increasingly accepted even in this place, despite the
blatant loss of precision its use implies.
Words can be powerful. Ask any communist, capitalist,
feminist, racist, anti-racist or marketing gobbledegook-monger. We
should take a little more care of our language. The stricter rules
governing the use of many foreign languages have their uses
sometimes. Don't tell me that French and German, for example, are not
expressive languages - we have adopted many of their phrases.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

Peter Thomas wrote in
news
snip
What I do relish is that speech Radio Four seems on the whole to be
better pronounced and more articulate than the televised version.

Moira Stuart's "resignation" hasn't helped TV's case the I thought she
had a superbly clear voice.

--
Bewdley, Worcs. ~90m asl.

Gianna wrote:

Nick Gardner wrote:
In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

The only thing I can find wrong with that is that they have spelt 'rased'
with a 'z'.


That being the favoured and current spelling in the OED, which quotes
'razed to the ground' as an example of usage.
http://dictionary.oed.com/


My Chambers dictionary (admittedly 30 years old) has the meaning "to lay
level with the ground", similar to the example you give below, which would
translate "raze to the ground" as "lay level with the ground to the
ground".

I suppose that "raze to the ground" was used in speech to distinguish it
from "raised", but it's not necessary in print.



In the last decade or so it has become more common to use the 's' instead
of the 'z' in words such as rased (both are correct) to distinguish
British English from American English, the latter always use 'z'.

'rase' in this context appears to have fallen into disuse a couple of
hundred years ago.
"5. To demolish, to level with the ground; to RAZE. Now rare. Also with
up." (same source)



--
Graham P Davis
Bracknell, Berks., UK
Send e-mails to "newsman" as mails to "newsboy" are ignored.

In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood
has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

The only thing I can find wrong with that is that they have
spelt 'rased' with a 'z'.

In the last decade or so it has become more common to use the
's' instead of the 'z' in words such as rased (both are
correct) to distinguish British English from American English,
the latter always use 'z'.

My elderly Chambers Dictionary, 1972 edition, has a full entry
for 'raze', with a cross reference for 'rase' simply saying
'same as raze'.

Would you write 'gase' or 'amase' or 'grase' or 'crase'?

Anne

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 12:23:22 +0100, "Nick Gardner"
wrote:

In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

The only thing I can find wrong with that is that they have spelt 'rased'
with a 'z'.

Being of a certain age I was raised to spell it "razed".


In the last decade or so it has become more common to use the 's' instead of
the 'z' in words such as rased (both are correct) to distinguish British
English from American English, the latter always use 'z'.

Why should we want to distinguish British English spellings from
American English? Would it not be better for everyone if our
spellings converged rather than diverged. I recognize that Americans
have just as much "ownership" of the language as any other
English-speaking peoples, and their spellings and usage are no
"better" or "worse" than ours.

"The Times" has always, to my admittedly uncertain knowledge, always
used the "z" variant in words that end in "ize".

Martin

________________
Nick G
Otter Valley, Devon
83 m amsl
http://www.ottervalley.co.uk

On 6 Oct, 23:00, JPG wrote:
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 12:23:22 +0100, "Nick Gardner"

wrote:
In the Radio Times for today, the synopsis for Robin Hood has ". . .
Knighton Hall is razed to the ground . . ."

Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

The only thing I can find wrong with that is that they have spelt 'rased'
with a 'z'.

Being of a certain age I was raised to spell it "razed".



In the last decade or so it has become more common to use the 's' instead of
the 'z' in words such as rased (both are correct) to distinguish British
English from American English, the latter always use 'z'.

Why should we want to distinguish British English spellings from
American English? Would it not be better for everyone if our
spellings converged rather than diverged. I recognize that Americans
have just as much "ownership" of the language as any other
English-speaking peoples, and their spellings and usage are no
"better" or "worse" than ours.

"The Times" has always, to my admittedly uncertain knowledge, always
used the "z" variant in words that end in "ize".

Martin

________________
Nick G
Otter Valley, Devon
83 m amsl
http://www.ottervalley.co.uk

I have to admit to some sympathy with the BBC Weather Centre
forecasters, in the use of "hazy" to describe sunshine that has been
reduced by thin high cloud; even though it is technically incorrect.
The reduction in sunshine can be significant - and how else do you
succinctly describe the effect?

John