I enjoyed these, but then I've told I have a really warped sense of humour ! I suppose some of them may not sound different at all depending on what part of the world you are in and the dialect common to your area, but it highlights one aspect of why English is difficult to learn.
1) The bandage was wound around the wound.
2) The farm was used to produceproduce.
3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.
4) We must polish the Polish furniture..
5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.
6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert..
7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.
8 ) A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.
9) When shot at, the dovedove into the bushes.
10) I did not object to the object.
11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.
12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
13) They were too close to the door to close it.
14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.
15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.
16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
18) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear..
19) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
20) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?
Ian
If at first you don't succeed, just get a bigger hammer !
I'm the only native English speaker in my home, and I've seen several forms of that post before. All too true. Add phrasal verbs (turn on, turn up, turn in) and that the order of words in a sentence can completely change the meaning of the sentence, all can make for some interesting (and sometimes funny) things heard around here.
What is interesting about English, is that initially it is an easy language to learn. Like learning to play guitar. Teach someone 3 or 4 chords, and he's playing half of Neil Young's set list. But to become well spoken (or a talented guitarist) takes much more effort.
When I took a course back in the early 90s for radio announcing / news broadcasting we had a few tongue twisters that tested your pronunciation.
One in particular was about a person called Theophilus Thistle, see how you can handle this one, try it eight times fast repetitiously without making a mistake.
Theophilus Thistle, the Thistle Sifter,
Sifted a sieve of unsifted thistles.
If Theophilus Thistle, the Thistle Sifter,
Sifted a sieve of unsifted thistles,
Where is the sieve of un-sifted thistles
Theophilus Thistle, the Thistle Sifter, sifted?
Suzsmokeyallan wrote:When I took a course back in the early 90s for radio announcing / news broadcasting we had a few tongue twisters that tested your pronunciation.
One in particular was about a person called Theophilus Thistle, see how you can handle this one, try it eight times fast repetitiously without making a mistake.
Theophilus Thistle, the Thistle Sifter,
Sifted a sieve of unsifted thistles.
If Theophilus Thistle, the Thistle Sifter,
Sifted a sieve of unsifted thistles,
Where is the sieve of un-sifted thistles
Theophilus Thistle, the Thistle Sifter, sifted?
"I'm not the pheasant plucker,
I'm the pheasant plucker's son
And I'll be plucking pheasants
Until the pheasant plucker comes..."
Shouldn't that be 'the dove 'dived' into the bushes'? Maybe a UK v US grammatical thing. It's just something we don't say over here, a bit like 'snook' for 'sneaked' etc, etc.
Or maybe it's a 'Bushism' thing as in 'burglarized'?
Cumbria,
As a complete aside, I worked in a steel plant in Cumbria donkeys ages ago and could not understand a word they were saying! It took me ages to work out the simplest things.
Dove for dived is common usage in the US. As one dictionary put it, Both dived and dove are standard as the past tense of dive. Dived, historically the older form, is somewhat more common in edited writing, but dove occurs there so frequently that it also must be considered standard: The rescuer dove into 20 feet of icy water. Dove is an Americanism that probably developed by analogy with alternations like drive, drove and ride, rode.
And let's not get started on internet phonetic spelling like "prolly" and I patients when they mean patience, or there instead of their.
It drives me nuts too, but the prior president did tend to misunderestimate the whole nucular thing so what can we expect.
[quote="tz375"]Dove for dived is common usage in the US. As one dictionary put it, Both dived and dove are standard as the past tense of dive. Dived, historically the older form, is somewhat more common in edited writing, but dove occurs there so frequently that it also must be considered standard: The rescuer dove into 20 feet of icy water. Dove is an Americanism that probably developed by analogy with alternations like drive, drove and ride, rode.
Workington no doubt. I live in the same bloody county and even I can't understand them!
Sorry tz, I agree with most of your comments but I can't accept the dove one. According to the Oxford dictionary (not Websters btw for US readers) for the verb it's 'past and past participle dived; US also dove'.
CumbriaSuzuki wrote:According to the Oxford dictionary (not Websters btw for US readers) for the verb it's 'past and past participle dived; US also dove'.
I actually think it more illustrative of the waves of immigrants, where they came from and possibly more importantly 'when'. Old English actually had two forms of 'dive' - strong and weak. The strong form 'dufan' had a p.p. of 'dofen'. OE didn't have a 'v' so eventually that led to 'dovan which gave 'dove', 'doven. and 'bedoven'. Its usage continued on in Scotland so it is the common form in Canada and also parts of the US first settled by Scottish (and Irish) immigrants. The other OE form of 'dive' - the weak form 'dyfan' - continued on England yielding dived. You see many OE forms continuing on in various parts of the world - much as you see Old French forms continuing on in places like Quebec. And of course they do more than continue on - they evolve and feed back over time. It is interesting to note, that some Spanish 'Spanish' usage today is considered 'quaint' in parts of South America
For a good read, check out 'The Stories of English' by David Crystal. Chapter 17 for example is about the origins, usage and derivations of 'y'all' (which is likely Irish by the way) - on the other hand, perhaps its just been too long a winter and I should really get a life ...................
Ian
If at first you don't succeed, just get a bigger hammer !
tz375 wrote:Dove for dived is common usage in the US. As one dictionary put it, Both dived and dove are standard as the past tense of dive. Dived, historically the older form, is somewhat more common in edited writing, but dove occurs there so frequently that it also must be considered standard: The rescuer dove into 20 feet of icy water. Dove is an Americanism that probably developed by analogy with alternations like drive, drove and ride, rode.
Workington no doubt. I live in the same bloody county and even I can't understand them!
Sorry tz, I agree with most of your comments but I can't accept the dove one. According to the Oxford dictionary (not Websters btw for US readers) for the verb it's 'past and past participle dived; US also dove'.
Pedantic, I know but that's what I get paid for.
I didn't say I shared that view - just quoted it as an indicator of the usage and Ian has added interesting info on the derivation of the word. I love the claim that dove is of Scottish or Irish usage and therefore OK as English. Don't tell the English that one.
I'm, English but spent more time in Scotland before I moved to the antipodes and from there to the USof A so I don't need subtitles on British movies. In the US they dubbed the first Mad Max and Trainspotting had subtitles.
Fair enough, but in my line of work (tech publications) I tend to find I get a bit anal about stuff like that
The great thing about the English language though is how fluid it is and how it keeps moving with the times, infuenced by various sources such as immigration, war, technological changes (text speak springs to mind) and cultural differences.
I read recently that when the US President (Franklin I think) adopted the original Websters dictionary 200 years ago, the US spelling was very much the same as UK but over time the UK was influenced more by French words and that's why we spell words like 'tyre' and 'theatre' and lots more besides differently to the US now. So if you think about it, US English is actually more 'English' than UK English. Funny old world ain't it
What you talking about. English English is the pure form.
Pure Anglo Saxon - and I don't want to hear about those Angles and Saxons being German invaders. Then there was 1066 with the Normans who brought so many new French words even though they originated in the Norse countries. And as for those Gauls and so on, no comment.
The way I tell the story is that the English language has two main roots. Daily life things like Bread and water came from German roots and intellectual words came from the French. I manage to ignore the Romans and a few other influences to keep the story simple.
I thought I read something a while ago about the idea behind Websters was that it would represent the language of the common man in America and not the language of the English aristocracy. His first was published in 1806 and included many "American" spellings. It was denounced by Jeffersonian republicans as being radical and too populist, a lexicon rather than a dictionary - or so I read.
language is interesting and the story and the way that people defend it are even more fascinating.
I suppose some of them may not sound different at all depending on what part of the world you are in and the dialect common to your area, but it highlights one aspect of why English is difficult to learn. 
