And yet the Brits still claim that it's their language...

[JohnT]

Well, they quote Bush don't they?

[MikeH]

And more importantly Arnie. Did Bush arrange that appointment to make him look less dumb?

[JohnT]

[Whaleboy]

NEVER!

I defend my right to use simplistic non-phonetic language not because it is easy, but because it is hard.

[Sandman]

Wee must ol adopt Amerikan rashunalizayshuns.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by JohnT
It isn't an example of good public speaking, but if that is the worst then the "reporters" sure aren't looking very hard.

I'm not sure. Most public speakers are people who are good at public speaking. While I've heard far worse simply chatting to people, for him to have a speach written like that seems more than a bit careless. While it is understood, it could have been made a hell of a lot easier to follow, as your first post shows.

And no, we won't adopt American English, because it's a dialect of English invented by the Americans. Why did the American's feel the need to change our language? Feel free to use your dialect as you wish, and we will continue to use English, as we do. Or you could call it American and consider it a seperate language.

[mrmitchell]

I'm disappointed. While had-too-much-Rum-sfeld's quote was pretty stupid, there must have been far, far worse ones out there.

Ahnold's was better, although it was just a garbled speech. I think Rumsfeld probably meant to say his quote.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
I'm disappointed. While had-too-much-Rum-sfeld's quote was pretty stupid, there must have been far, far worse ones out there.

And more recent. I'm still trying to wrap my brain around a nearly 2 year old quote qualifies for this years award.

[Buck Birdseed]

I think their Golden Bull Awards are better. The foot in Mouth award has had a uniformly low standard over the years, just look at its page, it must have few nominations or something.

[Kropotkin]

Most of us should know what Rumsfelt doesn't know, but I don't know if I know what Tungstens arguments has to do with the article. Neither is it known if Tungsten knows what he does or doesn't know.

[JohnT]

And no, we won't adopt American English, because it's a dialect of English invented by the Americans. Why did the American's feel the need to change our language? Feel free to use your dialect as you wish, and we will continue to use English, as we do. Or you could call it American and consider it a seperate language.

Languages change over time and distance, especially in the centuries (3 or so) that we've been separated without the benefit of mass communications. Did they not teach this in school?

However, if you truly believe that "American" is a separate language or dialect (as the above quote implies), then you too must be irritated at these people because they are awarding their award to people who don't even speak the same language.

[Spiffor]

Is "foot in the mouth" a genuine English expression anyways, or was it invented in the colonies?

[JohnT]

Spiff: http://phrases.shu.ac.uk/bulletin_bo...sages/650.html

[Spiffor]

Too bad
It would have been delicious if these Brits had used an expression originating in the US

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by JohnT


Languages change over time and distance, especially in the centuries (3 or so) that we've been separated without the benefit of mass communications. Did they not teach this in school?

However, if you truly believe that "American" is a separate language or dialect (as the above quote implies), then you too must be irritated at these people because they are awarding their award to people who don't even speak the same language.

A dialect of a language, in this instance, English, is still English. Mr. Rumsfeld's speech, whilst not being on the same level of verbal leadenness as the regulations for the ground nut scheme in Africa, or varieties of management speak in business manuals or government agencies, is still a dense thicket of badly thought through unnecessarily repetitious prose.

Not exactly the lucidity of the Gettysburg Address, is it?
I happen to believe that professional manglers of clear English, such as academics, post modernist culture commentators and politicians all deserve skewering on the lance of their own prolixity.

There is usually a point for repetition in public speaking: incantatory, emphatic use of terms helps put a point across, or clarifies a situation, or helps stir a crowd. Can you truly say that any of these was achieved by Rumsfeld's cloud of unknowing?