Thought I'd give this it's own thread as it was starting to cause a major diversion on its original thread. We have now thrashed out the peculiarly singular and plural words math and maths, both of which are short for mathematics (although I still find  'a mathematics' a bit odd) and had moved on to the peculiarities (for us Brits) of some of the expressions found in rules written in the US, my favourite being the use of 'the woods' on all occasions, singular, plural and idiomatic. Anyone come across any others, and similarly any transatlantic members come across peculiar expressions in British rulebooks/

The date thing bothers me.

07/04/99 is obviously the 7th April not the 4th of July. Only the Americans in dates eschew the convention that you get from largest to smallest or smallest to largest ... but not a mix.

Also "fanny" and "pants".

We British use the prefix "In" to make something negative

Inadequate- less than adequate
Inappropriate- Not Appropriate etc

Until we get to

Inflammable - Easily set alight. when surely it should be the opposite of Flammable ?

Quote from: Orcs on 08 April 2018, 09:10:41 PM

Inflammable - Easily set alight. when surely it should be the opposite of Flammable ?

Too true.

Many years ago this caught me out when first playing D&D - spider webs were inflammable according to the rules, therefore I ruled that they couldn't be burnt!!

Good shout. Had to look it up and here is the explanation from Merriam-Webster ...

It would all make sense if inflammable had started out as an English word. We get inflammable from the Latin verb inflammare, which combines flammare ("to catch fire") with a Latin prefix in-, which means "to cause to." This in- shows up occasionally in English words, though we only tend to notice it when the in- word is placed next to its root word for comparison: impassive and passive, irradiated and radiated, inflame and flame. Inflammable came into English in the early 1600s.

Things were fine until 1813, when a scholar translating a Latin text coined the English word flammable from the Latin flammare, and now we had a problem: two words that look like antonyms but are actually synonyms. There has been confusion between the two words ever since.

What do you do? To avoid confusion, choose flammable when you are referring to something that catches fire and burns easily, and use the relatively recent nonflammable when referring to something that doesn't catch fire and burn easily. Our files indicate that use of flammable and nonflammable has increased in print over the last few decades, while use of inflammable has decreased.

So there it is, "non-flammable" is the new "in" word. (Sorry, couldn't resist  ) 

Here are a couple of English words which are now commonly misused in Britain.

Amount - this word is usually associated with something which can be weighed or is uncountable, eg. a large amount of rice or a large amount of rainfall. However it is now frequently used to replace the word number, originally used where something was countable, eg a large number of people, a small number of buses. Replacing number with amount in those sentences sounds decidedly wrong yet fewer and fewer people use the word number these days.

Lead - we've been here before, but I am currently reading a book where it is constantly misused, resulting in me then having to re-read the sentence to put it right. Lead is either a heavy metal, a dog's leash or the present tense of the verb to lead. The book I am reading has substituted it for the word led, the past tense of the verb to lead.

And while we're at it, isn't it time somebody with a wicked sense of humour started the answer to a question with weave, stitch or knit rather than the dreaded sew!

Finally, whatever happened to two beautifully flowing English expressions that appear to have been replaced with Germanic clunkiness, i.e the railway station is now the train station and an early age is now (and this one I really loathe) a young age. That's definitely the first entry into the book, 'How to make your language ugly.'

Quote from: Leman on 09 April 2018, 10:34:27 AM
Lead - we've been here before, but I am currently reading a book where it is constantly misused, resulting in me then having to re-read the sentence to put it right. Lead is either a heavy metal, a dog's leash or the present tense of the verb to lead. The book I am reading has substituted it for the word led, the past tense of the verb to lead.

Which is why Led Zeppelin used the spelling LED as the first word......In case people thought that they meant the zeppelin that was the one in front of a group.....I believe that Keith Moon gave them that 'hint'.

Sad git, aren't I.

Cheers - Phil

So, inflammable/flammable is another foobar caused by English being a living language that likes to mug other languages for whatever grammar, syntax and vocabulary they have in their pockets

It's like it's in constant flux and usage!

So, Techno - LED Zeppelin - they didn't want to use Incandescent Zeppelin due to the fire risk and the energy saving potential of modern bulb technology? Very cutting edge for the sixties

I prefer children to be described as of a young age rather than an early age - the latter makes me wonder if they are Neanderthals or Autralopithecines

Then there are those who think Dour Puritan changed his name to Leman because they get confused between the meanings of the words, formally and formerly.

Fanshaw

Quote from: Westmarcher on 09 April 2018, 11:58:08 AM
Then there are those who think Dour Puritan changed his name to Leman because they get confused between the meanings of the words, formally and formerly.

You'll have to scold Leon over that one. I wish to be formally known as MR Leman. Changed my moniker after someone pointed out that DP sounded like something unpleasant that had been allowed to flow into a river in Chester. As for Leman, you've got to have a lot of respect for a man who insisted on sitting tight in a fort being bombarded by the best that both Krupp and Skoda could hurl at him.

Quote from: Westmarcher on 09 April 2018, 11:58:08 AM
Then there are those who think Dour Puritan changed his name to Leman because they get confused between the meanings of the words, formally and formerly.

Quote from: Leman on 09 April 2018, 06:33:19 PM
You’ll have to scold Leon over that one. I wish to be formally known as MR Leman. Changed my moniker after someone pointed out that DP sounded like something unpleasant that had been allowed to flow into a river in Chester. As for Leman, you’ve got to have a lot of respect for a man who insisted on sitting tight in a fort being bombarded by the best that both Krupp and Skoda could hurl at him.

I think it was myself who pointed out that DP had more than one possible meaning. There is the one listed above by Leman, and also the intimate act performed on a woman by two men ( or should it be performed on two men by a woman). 

Anyway Leman does command more respect than DP whichever version those letters make you think of.

leman

ˈlɛmən,ˈliːmən/

noun archaic

noun: leman; plural noun: lemans

    a lover or sweetheart.
        an illicit lover, especially a mistress.

Origin: Middle English lēofman, from lēof (see lief) + man.

Still seems pretty dodgy to me

Quote from: Leman on 09 April 2018, 06:33:19 PM
You'll have to scold Leon over that one. I wish to be formally known as MR Leman.

No, no, no, no. No escape. You are trapped in your fort, MR Leman. 

You know that you can edit your own Signature?