Monthly Archives: November 2018

Is this post a nothingburger?

Last month, the Oxford English Dictionary went through one of its regular updates – this OEDtime adding 350 new words to the English language. Words, that is, that have established themselves in the spoken language for long enough to be used widely, if infrequently, (or regularly among specific groups) but have not featured in the dictionary before.

Many of these words reflect changes in three spheres: music, films, and politics.

First, a new word in musical circles. Fam, which originally appeared in the English language in the sixteenth century as an abbreviation for family. Fam then fell into disuse other than as a colloquialism, had a brief resurgence in the 1990s as a slang term in American hip-hop, and has more recently been adopted in Britain, especially London, by rap and grime artists such as Stormzy and Lethal Bizzle.

New words from the film world include the comparing of a film’s style or acting to an iconic film -maker: Spielbergian, Bergmanesque etc. If a film is described as Tarantinoesque, for example, the critic would be referring to a director’s use of stylised and graphic violence (or maybe the film’s meandering plot).

Nothingburger was first used by a gossip columnist in Hollywood in the 1953, and came back into greater circulation more recently. It is used in politics, or more specifically political commentary, as a term of dismissal – something (or someone?) that seemed sound at first, but turned out to be insubstantial.

Also on the political front the dictionary includes alt-right (short for alternative right, meaning a hard right-wing political view) and idiocracy – a society of idiots; or maybe the actual government that is in power in that society. I’m not making a political point here about the current state of British or American politics. Just drawing your attention to words that have made it into the latest edition of the dictionary because they are now in (relatively) common usage.

But, who knows, they may all turn out to be nothingburgers.

Want to learn an interesting new word every day?

Follow the OED on Twitter: @OED 

Links to my books and social media

solstice logo (1)





Names As Food For Thought?

What’s in a name? As Shakespeare said, “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” However, the growing number of vegetarians and vegans has given some pubShoulder of lamb and restaurant proprietors a little concern about what to call their establishments. The owners of the Shoulder of Mutton pub in York, for example, felt that name might be deterring non-meat-eaters, so have changed it to Heworth Inn. (I haven’t asked if trade has subsequently picked up or not).

Using that logic Devil’s Beef Tub in Moffat, Scotland (named in reference to the cattle thieves who used to hide their stolen animals in the adjacent hollow in the hills) may want to consider a name change.

Some meaty sounding place names are not what they seem. In the UK there are several villages or districts called Ham (West Ham, East Ham etc.) This has nothing to do with the meat, but derives from the Old English word hamme, meaning a small plot of land / pasture. (Presumably cities like Birmingham and Nottingham started out as hamlets and just kept growing).

Likewise Swineshead, in Lincolnshire, is nothing to do with pigs, but comes from a mix of Svien (Norse) and swin (Old English) meaning tidal creek, and heda, the Old English for dock.

Other names sound wholesomely meat-free – like Cheddar Gorge in Somerset. But this has nothing to do with cheese, as the word cheddar comes from ceador, the Old English word for cavities (Cheddar Gorge is famous for its caves).

leeksI’m not sure whether the town of Leek was named after the vegetable, but it definitely sounds vegan friendly, if nothing else. Unlike Slaughterford in Gloucestershire, which is not, as the name suggests, a location for killing animals (human or otherwise). But it could be rather damp  – the name derives from slough, Old English for wet land.


Links to my books and social media

Swimming in Circles.

I like swimming. Next to taking the dog for a walk it is my most regular form of exercise – certainly way ahead of house-work and gardening. So I took more than a passing


Ross Edgley swimming past the white cliffs of Dover, SE England

interest in the adventures of Ross Edgley who recently swam round the whole of mainland Great Britain. This prompted features in some papers about him ‘circumnavigating’ the country. These articles subsequently prompted letters pointing out that he could not have circumnavigated the country unless he had been in a boat which required navigating skills. What he had achieved was the circumnatation of the country (Latin circa – around, natatatio – swimming).

The use of the word circumnatation then caused more correspondence along the lines of, as it does not appear in any dictionaries, or in the computer spell-checker, it can’t be a proper word. However you can Google it – and a web search will even turn up a literary use:Swimmer goldfish-bowl

Compton Mackenzie, in his 1914 novel, Sinister Street, describes a dreary boarding house room as being enlivened by ‘a bowl of blond goldfish, in ceaseless dim circumnatation.’

There must have been moments when Mr Edgley, like the goldfish, felt what he was doing was ceaseless – it took him several days longer than he’d bargained for – and the view, at brown sea-water level, must have been pretty dim most of the time. But it was, all in all, a fantastic achievement and he looked pretty pleased with himself when he finally came ashore.


Links to my books

Betrumped – a word, not a political move!

Edward Allhusen likes words, particularly words that roll round in the mouth and have a quaint, unfamiliar ring to them. He is a retired publisher and has devoted years of his life to ‘rescuing’ words he feels have a special place in the English language, but are in danger of dying out through lack of use.

In his recently published book Betrumped (which means cheated or deceived) he lists what he describes as a personal selection of now unfamiliar words, or words that have changed their meaning over the past few hundred years.

Some of the words listed are words I still use occasionally. Defenestrate, for example, meaning the act of throwing someone out of the window (from the Latin, fenestra – window) seemed to crop up regularly in history lessons about wars and religious cat-caterwaulingconflicts when I was at school. Caterwaul (high-pitched yowling) is probably a word from the fourteenth century that imitates the sound it is describing though, sadly, there is no etymological link to cats. It was also my mother’s description of most rock and pop singers in my youth. Hobbledehoy (a clumsy, uncouth youth), is possibly from sixteenth century French. Dipsomaniac (a drunkard) is from the Greek – dipsa (thirst) and mania. Pettifogger (a person who fusses over details) is possibly based on a German family of financiers – the Fuggers – in the sixteenth century.

There are some words listed that I have not heard before, like condiddle – to steal – though I still use the word diddle, if I feel someone has not given me enough change etc. This would suggest I was something of a juggins (easily fooled). Juggins was once a relatively common surname; again it could be an unfortunate family who were reputed to be a bit dim. It was another word often used in by my mother, this time in self-mockery – ‘Juggins, here, ended up doing the washing up again.

A couple of words that caught my eye have either changed in meaning (like innings, now a term in cricket but it used to mean land that is away from the sea), or do not mean cat - beerwhat you might think they should. Crapulence, for example is nothing to do with the inventor of the modern toilet, Thomas Crapper. It is from the Latin, crapula – drunkenness, usually accompanied by a headache – and hence an old-fashioned term for a hangover.


Links to my books – all free with Kindle Unlimited


Where did the term Music Hall come from?

I can remember watching ‘The Good Old Days’ on my grandparents’ back and white TV, later upgraded to colour. This was a programme of popular songs from the nineteenth and early twentieth century, screened in front of a live audience, who arrived dressed up in Edwardian clothes and were encouraged to join in.

Joining in the singing was part of the old music hall tradition, a tradition that started in music hall 2the public houses of the 1850s. Around this time landlords – always on the look-out for ways to sell more drinks – started to notice that on the evenings when certain singers came into the pub more drinkers would choose that evening to come in as well, so that they got a drink and a bit of entertainment at the same time. In time, landlords would set aside the saloon bar for the entertainers and audience, or open up a separate ‘singing room.’ As the entertainment became more and more popular, enterprising landlords built a ‘hall for music’ on the side of their pubs, with the name soon changing to ‘music hall.’ Some of the singers, such as Marie Lloyd, became house-hold names.

The main feature of a music hall was that it was an adjunct to a public house, and that drinking was actively encouraged throughout. In music halls the landlord stopping the singing and shouting ‘Order! order!‘ was not an instruction to behave, but an instruction to go and buy another drink or there’d be no more singing that night. (Other theatres didn’t allow alcohol in the auditorium, which probably explains some of the popularity of the music halls).

The Leeds City Varieties Music Hall, built as an adjunct to the White Swan Inn in 1865, was a typical example of a successful music hall. Like other venues though, its survival was threatened by the arrival of television and the popularity of home entertainment. This particular hall was saved by the decision of the BBC to film ‘The Good Old Days‘ there. The programme was so popular that it ran from 1953 to 1983. Lovingly restored it is still a popular venue for variety acts.Music hall


Links to my books

Remembering the First World War.

WW1 poppy_fields_1170x461

It’s a hundred years ago today that the First World War ended, and there are memorials taking place around the world to mark this. Many families were affected by the death or serious injuries (mental and physical) of the young men who fought for King and Country. The traditional role of women was also changed by the war as they left their homes to support the war effort, and brought up families single-handed. True, they were expected to meekly return to the kitchen once the men came home, but the genie was out of the bottle, and the vote and greater independence – both socially and in work –  followed.

Language was changed too, and phrases coined by the men at the front came into common usage when they returned home. Though with some, their meaning has changed subtly.

Over the top, for example, which referred to the act of scrambling out of the trench and running towards the enemy lines (quite possibly getting killed or injured in the process), now means anything excessive or a bit too much.

Catwalk was the name for the temporary, narrow wooden pathway over the mud (so named because of a cat’s ability to walk along the tops of thin walls), now refers to the strip of stage a model walks along to display the latest fashions.

Some phrases needed a rapid cleaning up to be used in mixed society. In the pink means being well and happy, but for soldiers at the front it had sexual connotations (use your imagination), whether realised or just hopeful.

Likewise bumf, which came to mean paperwork – quite possibly an excess of it – was a contraction of bum-fodder (again, use your imagination – no doubt they were short of loo rolls at the Front).

The soldiers in the First World War had khaki uniforms, unlike the splendidly attired WW1 soldiersoldiers of previous centuries. It made them less conspicuous and less likely to be picked out by snipers. The word khaki was not a WW1 invention. It comes from the nineteenth century Persian or Urdu word meaning dust.

Many men endured the dreadful conditions bravely, but were no doubt helped by a laconic sense of humour. I will finish today with a marching song from the First World War known as I Don’t Want to Die. I want to go home / I want to go home / I don’t want to go in the trenches no more / Where whizz-bangs and shrapnel they whistle and roar / Take me over the sea / Where the Alleyman can’t get me / Oh my / I don’t want to die / I want to go home. This was sung, of course, whilst marching stoically towards the Front, and in the full knowledge that they, or comrades, might never be going home.




The Origins of English

Where did the English language come from, and why do we mostly  speak English in the UK and the USA? I can’t answer the last question, but here is a brief summary of how English evolved from an unknown group of speakers living somewhere unspecified over 15,000 years ago. Early man

Around 14-15,000 years ago, their language evolved into three: distinct versions: New Guinea; Sino-Tibetan (which gave rise to Chinese), and Nostratic. Nostratic carried on evolving in different regions and, about 10,000 years ago, became what have been termed Afro-Asiatic (Hebrew and Arabic), Dravidian, and Eurasiatic.

Fast (?) forward around another 5,000 years and we have Eurasiatic dividing into Altaic, Uralic (the source of the Hungarian language), and Indo-European.

From the first millennium BC, Indo-European evolved into the prime source of many of the languages we now recognise: Indo-Iranian, Hellenic (Greek), Italic (e.g. French), Celtic (e.g. Welsh), Balto-Slavic, and Germanic.

Still with me?

From Germanic, in around 450 – 1100 AD, we get German, Dutch and Anglo-Saxon. And from Anglo-Saxon (also known as Old English e.g. Beowulf) we gallop (?) through the changes:

Middle English (1100 – 1450), e.g. Chaucer.

Early Modern English (1450 – 1700) e.g. Shakespeare.

Modern English from 1700.

Early man 2Language is still changing and we speak and write differently today from our ‘modern’ eighteenth century ancestors. However, we do not have much problem understanding what they wrote. It might be different the other way round, though. If some of them were tele-ported into 2018, what would they make of our text speak, computer terms used in everyday language, acronyms, office jargon and emoticons? Also our seeming preference to communicate via gadgets rather than directly?

Are we heading into the post-modern English era? Discuss!


Links to my books