Phrases/words that set your teeth on edge.

[P. G. Tipps]

Swiftly moving on, after pleasantly basking in the warm approbation from all, I'm pleased to inform members that I have not quite finished on the subject of 'Americanisms' ...

I have a feeeling I may have mentioned this one before, but repetition in argument (as in the greatest of music) may be no bad thing, indeed essential if one is to ram home the point to rather less observant and receptive minds.

Not content with using verbs for nouns we now copy our Atlantic cousins in confusing past and present tenses ... eg. ... 'I am now headed .. ' instead of 'I am now heading ... ' ... and, worse, this is also occasionally heard from contributors on the BBC.

Old Moonface (aka Father John Manners S.J.) would have been truly appalled and have issued twelve ferulas from the grave if I ever even dared to now speak in such an obscene manner ... and rightly so.

Mr Cameron should have a word with President Obama and then appear on television to tell us what he is going to do about it all ... the old Mother Country deserves nothing less, after all.

[ahinton]

Swiftly moving on

Muss es sein? Es muss sein!, it would sadly appear...

I'm pleased to inform members that I have not quite finished on the subject of 'Americanisms'

I suppse that someone has to be...

I have a feeeling I may have mentioned this one before, but repetition in argument (as in the greatest of music) may be no bad thing, indeed essential if one is to ram home the point to rather less observant and receptive minds

So you perceive your rôle in this as some kind of head-banger, then? - determined to put across your thoughts and ideas (such as they are) on the subject until those who are "less obervant and receptive" than you (which is French for "wrong and misinformed") agree with you? Well, never mind repetition "in the gretest music", imagine extracting all the repetition in Philip Glass; with how much music might one be left? Repetition's not allowed in Just a Minute and may therefore be challenged.

Not content with using verbs for nouns we now copy our Atlantic cousins in confusing past and present tenses ... eg. ... 'I am now headed .. ' instead of 'I am now heading ... ' ... and, worse, this is also occasionally heard from contributors on the BBC.

Why is it "worse" when used on BBC than it is anywhere else? I don't happen to use such expressions myself, but then, as a Scot, there are probably plenty of Yorkshire, Cornish and Kentish idioms that I don't use either, so why you focus in particular on "our American cousins"' (I have no such cousins, incidentally) use of English seems unclear.

Old Moonface (aka Father John Manners S.J.) would have been truly appalled and have issued twelve ferulas from the grave if I ever even dared to now speak in such an obscene manner ... and rightly so.

Who's he? And do 12 ferulas equal a fatwa? And for what does "S.J." stand? Scottish Jock? So many questions - so little time...

As far as I can tell, the nearest to an obscenity in your "speech" here is the splitting of an infinitive.

Mr Cameron should have a word with President Obama

He does a lot of that already and the latter's probably getting about as fed up with it as is HM QEII following his regular visits..

and then appear on television to tell us what he is going to do about it all

So use of English has a place in Conservative Party policy, does it? I know that manifestos, like most other promises and rules in musical composition, are to be broken, but I don't recall seeing anything about English usage in any party manifesto or indeed in any legislation passed during my lifetime...

the old Mother Country deserves nothing less, after all

Not only do I have no American cousins, I didn't have a country for a mother either.

I am rapidly arriving at the conclusion that this P. G. Tipps stuff addles the brain; you'd doubtless be better off with the occasional wee dram of amber nectar with or without an even more wee splash of Scottish spring water, methinks.

[jean]

...we now copy our Atlantic cousins in confusing past and present tenses ... eg. ... 'I am now headed .. ' instead of 'I am now heading ... '

That's not a confusion of past and present, Tippsy. 'Headed' is probably a past participle, but they're used in all tenses of the passive - so if your example is any kind of confusion, it's probably best thought of as between transitive and intransitive.

But the version you dislike is very similar to 'was sat' and 'was stood' instead of 'was sitting' and 'was standing', an idiom from the North of England (probably) now quite prevalent even on the BBC.

The Scots do some odd things with past participles too, don't they? Think of 'this wants done' where we would say 'this wants doing'.

[Pabmusic]

Swiftly moving on, after pleasantly basking in the warm approbation from all, I'm pleased to inform members that I have not quite finished on the subject of 'Americanisms' ...

...Not content with using verbs for nouns we now copy our Atlantic cousins in confusing past and present tenses ... eg. ... 'I am now headed .. ' instead of 'I am now heading ... ' ... and, worse, this is also occasionally heard from contributors on the BBC...

Leaving aside the comment about using verbs for nouns (something the British have done for many centuries) I came across this, which I happily attribute to one David L., a boarder on the American site UsingEnglish.com. In a post dated March 5, 2009, discussing why some people say 'heading for' and others say 'headed for' he says:

Whilst some people may use them interchangeably, or more likely, invariably say 'headed for', I don't think that should deter from understanding the difference in meaning:

To ask, 'where are you headed?' is simply enquiring after the destination.

That the speaker uses the Present Continuous, 'where are you heading' denotes the speaker's perspective is of having caught the person en-route, 'mid-journey' to the destination. As such, the speaker's perspective is as much about the travelling towards, as it is the actual destination.
So - two people walking on campus bump into each other. One says, "Where are you heading?"
When told, say, "The library.", the speaker may respond, "I'm off to the chem. lab. for a practical. I'll come as far as the Physics building - give us a chance to arrange about Saturday."
Here, the perspective is of the possibility of journeying together in relation to their destinations.

A policeman might guess that a bankrobber is headed for the Mexican border after a job.
A radio dispatcher might say, "He was last seen heading for San Diego" since the perspective is the progress of the chase to catch him en route.

I think it's an excellent answer, and a good reminder that neither "where are you headed" nor "where are you heading" are past tense constructions.

[ahinton]

Leaving aside the comment about using verbs for nouns (something the British have done for many centuries) I came across this, which I happily attribute to one David L., a boarder on the American site UsingEnglish.com. In a post dated March 5, 2009, discussing why some people say 'heading for' and others say 'headed for' he says:

Whilst some people may use them interchangeably, or more likely, invariably say 'headed for', I don't think that should deter from understanding the difference in meaning:

To ask, 'where are you headed?' is simply enquiring after the destination.

That the speaker uses the Present Continuous, 'where are you heading' denotes the speaker's perspective is of having caught the person en-route, 'mid-journey' to the destination. As such, the speaker's perspective is as much about the travelling towards, as it is the actual destination.
So - two people walking on campus bump into each other. One says, "Where are you heading?"
When told, say, "The library.", the speaker may respond, "I'm off to the chem. lab. for a practical. I'll come as far as the Physics building - give us a chance to arrange about Saturday."
Here, the perspective is of the possibility of journeying together in relation to their destinations.

A policeman might guess that a bankrobber is headed for the Mexican border after a job.
A radio dispatcher might say, "He was last seen heading for San Diego" since the perspective is the progress of the chase to catch him en route.

I think it's an excellent answer, and a good reminder that neither "where are you headed" nor "where are you heading" are past tense constructions.

Indeed - and thank you for this; I fear that at least some of our resident Tippster's assumptions and conclusions arise from the unhealthy combination of an overly simplistic take on English usage and an apparent lack of understanding that language and its use is morphing all the time.

[jean]

The attempt in Pabs's post to distinguish between was headed/was heading as static/dynamic is very similar to the one often offered in respect of was sat/was sitting.

It works less well in the present case, I think.

The explanation offered also avoids the issue (sic) which causes such problems to anyone wedded to explanations couched in traditional grammatical terms - for while one can attach the label present continuous to 'was heading', as the author does, 'was headed' is either a present passive, or it resists the traditional labels altogether. So the author does not label it at all.

.

[french frank]

Think of 'this wants done' where we would say 'this wants doing'.

'We' being? I would say, regardless of the extra wordage: 'This needs to be done.'

'Wants doing'???

Second thoughts: This needs doing

[jean]

Would you not say 'this needs doing', though? I would!

There's no possible objection on grounds of traditional grammar, as 'doing' would be a verbal noun (or gerund if you prefer.)

But my point ws rather about 'this wants/needs done', which I'd think neither of us would say. This seems to be, like 'was headed', and 'was sat', a past participle escaping from its tradtional function and difficult to describe using traditional categories.

[edit: yes, we can agree about needs doing!]

[ahinton]

Would you not say 'this needs doing', though? I would!

There's no possible objection on grounds of traditional grammar, as 'doing' would be a verbal noun (or gerund if you prefer.)

Good point; again, in addition to my surmise in response to Pabs (#2825), P. G.'s problem when referring with ill-concealed pejorative intent to what he believes to be the particular "Americanisms" that appear to create a verb from a noun is couched in a curiously entrenched reluctance to accept the very existence and function of gerunds (and perhaps also gerundives) which, after all, are hardly a recent phenomenon, stll less one confined to British English usage.

A Scottish American whom I know would say of her cat that, at times, she "needs brushed"; the mere fact that "needs brushing" or indeed "needs to be brushed" would be acceptable and understandable alternatives to that expression seems to me not to undermine is legitimacy.

[vinteuil]

The attempt in Pabs's post to distinguish between was headed/was heading as static/dynamic is very similar to the one often offered in respect of was sat/was sitting.

It works less well in the present case, I think.

.

... I don't see the objection to "I was headed".

"I am bound for Australia" ; "I am headed for Australia".

The same grammatical form, nesspa?

[P. G. Tipps]

Tippsy ... the Scots do some odd things with past participles too, don't they? Think of 'this wants done' where we would say 'this wants doing'.

The Scots most certainly do some very odd things, not just with past participles, of that we are in complete if somewhat unnatural agreement, jeanie.

However, 'this wants done' is a new Scottish phrase to me ... maybe it is yet another frightful Americanism that has descended on Glasgow, which has always been so Americanised it even planned its admittedly imposing city-centre streets on the American grid-system.

I'm sure one would never hear such a peculiar and horrid-sounding phrase in Edinburgh.

[ahinton]

The Scots most certainly do some very odd things, not just with past participles, of that we are in complete if somewhat unnatural agreement, jeanie.

However, 'this wants done' is a new Scottish phrase to me ... maybe it is yet another frightful Americanism that has descended on Glasgow, which has always been so Americanised it even planned its admittedly imposing city-centre streets on the American grid-system.

So is the fact that it's new to you proof in and of itself that it might be "another frightful Americanism"? - and, for that matter, ae all "Americanisms", genuine or otherwise, "frightful" to you?

I'm sure one would never hear such a peculiar and horrid-sounding phrase in Edinburgh.

You might be "sure" but do you have proof? But as to what might be heard in Edinburgh, you might be better to consult the primer of miss jean...

[jean]

... I don't see the objection to "I was headed".

"I am bound for Australia" ; "I am headed for Australia".

The same grammatical form, nesspa?

I don't think so (except that in the most general way both bound and headed are used adjectivally).

'Bound' is most commonly found as past participle of to bind, and at first glance these two do look like the same grammatical form, whatever that is.

But in the case of I am headed, as of I am sat, there's a parallel form I am heading/sitting. Whereas I am binding clearly doesn't have the required meaning.

I wondered then if I am bound for... might be a true passive of the verb to bind, as in I am bound to (take some course of action) - that is, someone's forcing me in that direction.

But it appears to be a different word, though influenced by to bind. The OED tells me:

Etymology: < Old Norse búinn, Norwegian būen, past participle of búa to get ready, appearing first in the north as būn , afterwards in Middle English boun ; the added d in the modern form may be due in part to its being regarded as the past participle of the derived verb boun v., and in part to confusion with bound adj.2 = obliged...

[vinteuil]

... 'bound' in the sense of 'headed for' doesn't seem to have any connection with 'to bind'.

The OED to which I have access (an ancient first edn, none of your on-line sophistications... ) seems to regard it as a past participle of [obsolete] 'to boun'

So - 'bound' and 'headed' - both adjectival past participles.

Wherein any harm?

[Serial_Apologist]

You might be "sure" but do you have proof? But as to what might be heard in Edinburgh, you might be better to consult the primer of miss jean...

Oh, very good!