Jusr in time to curse politicians and their robocalls, here's the good news.

What exactly is a "life coach" anyway? I was recently at a conference where they speaker was suggesting the audience employ a clinical psychologist, which is said is not a "life coach."

I am also mad about "ear worm." If "ear worm" can go into the dictionary, when we have the perfectly good "Ohrwurm," why is there such obstruction to putting "epicaricacy" in the dictionary?

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
I am also mad about "ear worm." If "ear worm" can go into the dictionary, when we have the perfectly good "Ohrwurm," why is there such obstruction to putting "epicaricacy" in the dictionary?

Because it's not about whether there's already a perfectly good word, it's about whether the word is used.

Well, that doesn't hold water, either, because "epicaricacy" is in many specialty dictionaries and is used all over the Internet. I know because I have a Google Alert going on it.

I honestly think there is something a little funny about it when I see all these really weird words and phrases put into the dictionary.

Perhaps my limerick (which is now approved!) on OEDIlF will persuade the powers that be.

Which dictionary do you mean by "the dictionary", and which specialty dictionaries is the word in?

And the question is not just "is it used" but "is it used often enough to warrant space in a dictionary"

This message has been edited. Last edited by: goofy,

There are plenty of inkhorn words that have not made it into dictionaries. It's just that Kalleh really, really likes the e-word.

Almost all of its uses on the internet consist of people arguing whether it belongs in a dictionary or arguing complaining that it isn't.

I find it humorous to imagine some cabal of lexicographers sitting around agreeing that some word should or shouldn't be in "the dictionary".

Yeah, z, it is humorous to think about some cabal of lexicographers, isn't it? Clearly I was going too far with that. I will confess to being a little confused about it, though.

Goofy, I liked your link, and particularly this paragraph:

quote:

Think of the dictionary as less of a Social Register for words and more like a word general store. I am the manager of the word general store. Do I stock only words in my size? Only in the flavors I like? Only the words I wish people would use? No — I provide a wide selection of words for the use of all my customers. And because my customers are such a wide group (basically, all adult readers and writers) I have to make sure to include the words that will serve their needs.

I started my epicaricacy Blog so that I wouldn't irritate people here about my obsession with the word. Sorry about that...back to the Blog.

quote:

it is humorous to think about some cabal of lexicographers, isn't it?

The BBC programme Balderdash and Piffle gave the impression that words were submitted to a group of lexicographers for an ex cathedra judgment, although it dealt with etymologies of words already in the dictionary.

The presenter, Victoria Coren, would sit in front of a panel of three lexicographers, headed by John Simpson, and present the new information that had been shown to have been gathered in the main part of the programme. The panel would then decide whether they felt the dictionary entry for a particular word should be updated or not.

This scene was clearly a dramatic device for the purposes of TV, although it could easily give the impression that that was how the OED made all such decisions.

Nowadays the existence of the various English corpora has made the identification of "new" words and their frequency of use rather easier than before.

Boy, that show would never make it here in the US. We're too enthralled with shows like Jersey Shore or the Kardashians.

I wonder how those decisions are made.

The one thing I will give give John Simpson, and crew, is that most of the references to "epicaricacy" are about the word itself, and not about using it. Not all; but most. When I first started talking about the word, complaints were that there were only self references, but that really isn't the case anymore.

quote:

Boy, that show would never make it here in the US. We're too enthralled with shows like Jersey Shore or the Kardashians.

I understand this fall John Simpson will host a show where he submits a word (not to exceed six letters) to the Kardashians. Then they have an hour to try to use it in a sentence.

Neither Jersey Shore nor the Kardashians have been aired on UK TV - and although I did see some truly foul US TV shows when I was in Canada, neither of those appeared.

I get the impression that our UK equivalent of Jersey Shore is The Only Way Is Essex. The Kardashians is apparently a rewrite of The Osbournes with a different set of rich idiots.

Good grief!

Oh, now don't get me started on how awful US TV is getting! So many horrible "reality" shows filling the airwaves. I've cancelled cable at our house to save money and my son and I are quite enjoying movies and old TV shows streaming on Netflix. They're so much better without all the commercials, too, especially during this political ad season!

quote:

Oh, now don't get me started on how awful US TV is getting!

Getting? I thought US TV was already at a point so low it couldn't get any lower.

The one thing I REALLY hate about my visits to Canada is the TV (which is marginally better than US TV - but still awful). Fortunately it is possible to get BBC world - but apart from that and the occasional British programme that finds its way over - the TV diet is positively indigestable.

Incidentally, the opening ceremony on the paralympics was aired on Channel 4 - one of our commercial channels - and there were some short advertising breaks. Although they were no more than about 5 minutes in the hour there has been a huge uproar in the media about the fact that the breaks meant that some countries' contestants might not have been seen fully. The calls have been almost unanimous that the BBC should have been given the job (they lost it because C4 outbid them) or that C4 should have not aired the advertisements until after the ceremony had been completed (which has happened in the past with the commercial channels).

I wonder how many of those who complained about these advertising breaks had been exposed to the awfulness of US TV where, it seems to me, the breaks take up around 50% of the air time.

My daughter sat down in front of the TV for the first time in months to actually watch a scheduled show, the first episode of this season's Dr. Who. My son hasn't sat down in front of a TV in years. They watch videos on their computers, and think TVs are what old people watch: kind of quaint, like electric typewriters or sewing machines without USB ports.

As much as anything whether you watch TV on a computer or on an "old-fashioned" set in the living room depends on your attitude to companionship.

Computer use is a solitary activity; TV-watching is usually a social activity. If you're happy with the companionship only of the screen, then you'll be happy to watch online.

quote:

Originally posted by neveu:
My daughter sat down in front of the TV for the first time in months to actually watch a scheduled show, the first episode of this season's Dr. Who.

Good for her! Wasn't it awesome?

quote:

I wonder how many of those who complained about these advertising breaks had been exposed to the awfulness of US TV where, it seems to me, the breaks take up around 50% of the air time.

Not 50%, but too much, I agree. Far be it for me to support the American TV programs...however, there are some good programs. But there is a lot of trash, too.

quote:

Computer use is a solitary activity; TV-watching is usually a social activity.

Ah well, it depends. Shu and I recently watched a great old movie on my laptop. We rented it from Amazon.

quote:

Not 50%, but too much, I agree. Far be it for me to support the American TV programs...however, there are some good programs. But there is a lot of trash, too.

Your must tell me where to find them ready for the next time I'm your side of the Atlantic.

On a recent visit I tried to watch "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" on US TV and I gave up by the time the children had gone through the wardrobe for the second time. I just couldn't stand the fact that, every five minutes or so, the programme just switched, without warning, to some facile advertisement.


In the UK, in addition to having the time that can be devoted to advertising (which is only allowed on the commercial channels, not on the BBC) strictly limited, all advertisements must be clearly separated from the programmes, with a separate transfer screen at the beginning and the end of the advertisements.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
Shu and I recently watched a great old movie on my laptop.

Imagine how weird that sentence would have sounded thirty years ago!

quote:

TV-watching is usually a social activity.

quote:

I just couldn't stand the fact that, every five minutes or so, the programme just switched, without warning, to some facile advertisement.

That's the time you are supposed to mute the sound and converse with your companions.
My kids find old-fashioned network television as bizarre as a book that is only available to be read one particular hour a week with someone who yells in your ear every six minutes. If it's not streaming on Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, youtube, Hulu, Vimeo or some other website they might resort to recording it on the DVR, but "watching television" is eye-rollingly anachronistic.

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:
On a recent visit I tried to watch "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" on US TV and I gave up by the time the children had gone through the wardrobe for the second time. I just couldn't stand the fact that, every five minutes or so, the programme just switched, without warning, to some facile advertisement.

I've started to use TV the way I use radio (I note a selection I like w/station & time, chasing the title via an online playlist later, then listen to audio samples & maybe buy the CD). w/TV, I'll catch a piece of a cool thriller, put up w/ad interruptions for a while, then make a note of the title. By Sat eve, I've found it either 'on demand' or on Netflix so my husband & I can enjoy it uninterrupted.

Yes, many watch TV with no commercials on "on demand" (or through other technologies) now. Others don't mind the commercials for doing things in this multi-tasking society. And, of course, there is public TV with no commercials. So we do have a number of ways to deal with the ads here in the U.S., Richard.

And as for watching TV with a companion, I don't think TV is watched that way nearly as much anymore. It used to be, I agree, and maybe it still is in England? Here, watching TV just isn't a family activity anymore, unless it's something like the Olympics or election results or maybe a movie. Heck, tonight Shu watched ET upstairs as he was on his iPad, and I watched it downstairs as I was on my computer.

I can only speak for my acquaintances, of course, but most of my contemporaries seem to watch TV as they always used to watch TV.

Mind you, we in the UK watch more TV than any other country - apart from the USA, which is first equal with us - http://www.nationmaster.com/gr...a-television-viewing

Which obviously means that there is no correlation between quality and viewing levels, since I have heard that UK TV is generally considered to be amongst the world's best and US TV the opposite.

quote:

since I have heard that UK TV is generally considered to be amongst the world's best and US TV the opposite.

Jingoism

Yeah, we're crap here, Richard. Crap, crap, crap and more crap. You English are the greatest race on earth, and we bastard progeny of English horse thieves and heretics are crap.

quote:

most of my contemporaries

I think that's the key phrase here.

quote:

Yeah, we're crap here, Richard. Crap, crap, crap and more crap

I ain't bovvered.

quote:

I can only speak for my acquaintances, of course, but most of my contemporaries seem to watch TV as they always used to watch TV.

Beware of making generalisations from small reference pools!

quote:

I have heard that UK TV is generally considered to be amongst the world's best and US TV the opposite.

Who did you hear that from? The aforementioned acquaintances?

The plural of anecdote is not data.

All right. Having watched much US TV and much UK TV I will say that from my personal and considerable experience, most US TV is terrible compared with UK TV.

And that's not what I've heard; it's what I have seen and know to be a fact.

I am sure there are statistics to be found about the best-regarded broadcasting services but I haven't time to search for them right now.

quote:

And that's not what I've heard; it's what I have seen and know to be a fact.

....and know to be an opinion.

US television does lots of things better than the UK. Fights and explosions in UK productions are nearly always second-rate and relatively rare. Sex in th US is always more interesting -- if that wasn't so, why did Prince Harry have to come here to get naked? Also US TV shows based on British hits are always more pleasurable to watch since the actors don't have terrible English accents.

And I was shocked... shocked, I tell you... when, while watching an old game show from the 70s on a cable network, the late George Peppard (he wasn't late then, just moving toward it) in the middle of a game reached in his pocket, and LIT A CIGARETTE! No one would dare do that now-a-days.

quote:

...and know to be an opinion.

All matters of preference must, at least to some extent, be matters of opinion. But it is an opinion based on considerable observation; it is not an unfounded religious-type belief.

quote:

Fights and explosions in UK productions are nearly always second-rate and relatively rare.

Thank goodness...

quote:

Sex in th US is always more interesting

Maybe because Americans spend more time boasting about it than getting on with it. And I don't actually believe that Harry's little episode was a TV show, was it?

quote:

Also US TV shows based on British hits are always more pleasurable to watch since the actors don't have terrible English accents

You mean the actors don't speak proper English?

quote:

And I was shocked... shocked, I tell you... when, while watching an old game show from the 70s on a cable network, the late George Peppard (he wasn't late then, just moving toward it) in the middle of a game reached in his pocket, and LIT A CIGARETTE! No one would dare do that now-a-days.

I agree. And what has this to do with British versus US TV?

quote:

And I don't actually believe that Harry's little episode was a TV show, was it?

Around here it was.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:

quote:

And I don't actually believe that Harry's little episode was a TV show, was it?

Around here it was.

That it was covered in US TV news might be true - but that doesn't make it a TV show.

I wonder what other world-shattering news was covered by mainstream US TV on that date?

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
Also US TV shows based on British hits are always more pleasurable to watch since the actors don't have terrible English accents.

?????

The "cigarette" paragraph was meant as an aside comment about tthe major differences between what is allowed now as sopposed to then.

I am truly amazed that RE and others believe my facetious comments about UK/US programing wsas meant seriously. Must every comment be littered with emoticons so you recognize the humor?

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
Must every comment be littered with emoticons so you recognize the humor?

Yes.

Well OK then

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
The "cigarette" paragraph was meant as an aside comment about tthe major differences between what is allowed now as sopposed to then.

I am truly amazed that RE and others believe my facetious comments about UK/US programing wsas meant seriously. Must every comment be littered with emoticons so you recognize the humor?

I did realise that your comments were not 100% serious; neither were mine.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
Here, watching TV just isn't a family activity anymore, unless it's something like the Olympics or election results or maybe a movie.

In our family the tv is still like the hearth of yore.

quote:

Originally posted by bethree5:

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
Here, watching TV just isn't a family activity anymore, unless it's something like the Olympics or election results or maybe a movie.

In our family the tv is still like the hearth of yore.

We still have a hearth and use it during the winter. You can't beat the ambience of an open fire.

quote:

and LIT A CIGARETTE! No one would dare do that now-a-days.

Probably not in the US ... folk still happily puffing away in UK soaps; which may make acting a very interesting job proposition indeed.

Nothing more boring than politically correct stuff and global mind-adjusting.

Bea

I have missed most of this thread and that's probably just as well. Same old, same old, Richard. How many times have we heard all of this before. <sigh>

Bethree, I am glad your family watches television together. That can make for a great family evening. However, I disagree with Richard that the "new" technology has booted aside that television family time that some have given up. As I said, Shu and I watch movies together on my laptop. I keep up with lots of my far-away family via Facebook. Texting with my kids or husband during the day keeps me so much more connected than I used to be. Nobody reads my blog ( ), but if they did, they'd find some exceptional intellectualism. (Cough! Cough!) And so on. In other words, watching television together can be a warm, wonderful activity. But so can new technologies.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
I have missed most of this thread and that's probably just as well. Same old, same old, Richard. How many times have we heard all of this before. <sigh>

But if it's still relevant (and it wasn't I who brought the topic up) then it bears repeating. There will be users of this forum who might not have experienced other countries' media.

quote:

However, I disagree with Richard that the "new" technology has booted aside that television family time that some have given up

I don't think I suggested that. I suggested that TV watching tended to be a family activity and computer use a solitary occupation - but those who use their computers as if they were TVs will tend to adopt TV patterns of behaviour.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
Bethree, I am glad your family watches television together. That can make for a great family evening. However, I disagree with Richard that the "new" technology has booted aside that television family time that some have given up.

I agree Kalleh. We've always enjoyed sharing shows etc w/each other, & this has been enhanced by being able to choose shows from on-demand or netflix, & to check out newly-mixed music videos made by my aud-engr son (on youtube via TV/internet). Meanwhile, a fave activity-- fact-checking or learning more about a show in progress via laptop-- can now be done even more easily via iphone.

RE: movies on laptop, I treasure the memory of watching a pirated movie w/my eldest, pre-laptops, on his tiny gameboy-w/-internet perched atop a dozen books on the coffee table.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:

quote:

since I have heard that UK TV is generally considered to be amongst the world's best and US TV the opposite.

Jingoism

I was reminded of this comment when I watched a recent speech by Obama which he ended with the words, "...The greatest country in the whole world..." - which to my mind is far more jingoistic (An appeal intended to arouse patriotic emotions) than my comment about the superiority of British TV.

In fact, I believe that we British should be far more jingoistic than we are. It rarely (never?) happens that public figures talk about how wonderful Britain is in this manner.

But for those who would like to see one of the rare occasions when we are truly jingoistic, watch the Last Night of the Proms (which was yesterday). The second half is the most jingoistic and you can see it here http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01mm5cf

Whereas the sentiments expressed in "Land of Hope and Glory" belong to a past age, those of us (including me) who can remember when the British Empire was still extant and still the largest in the world, do feel a significant measure of pride in our country.

quote:

"...The greatest country in the whole world..." - which to my mind is far more jingoistic

Yep, let's bring Obama into this conversation...and Romney, too, for that matter. That will clarify things.

I can only say that I have the utmost respect for our English friends. They have great TV, inventions, museums, art, music, and even food. I think most Americans feel that way. We don't compare as much as the British, apparently, but we surely do respect our British colleagues.

For the record, I certainly disagree that the U.S. has the worst TV. Yes, some of it is drek, as I am sure some English TV is. However, some of it is good (I hesitate to say "great"). I am sorry you didn't experience good TV in the "many" times you were here, Richard. You did experience our good (and bad!) beer, if I recall.