The insidious replacement of 'probably' by the americanism 'likely'.

[sidebirds]

Intolerable!

But the Romans thought it was horrifically bad so its original meaning and its extension in common parlance would have both been hyperbolic. We don’t have the practice anymore so should this perfectly cromulent word be forcibly retired?

That’s really interesting. I hadn’t thought about whether Americans actually say it. But it’s definitely A Thing in written English, and I only became aware of it when I got my first job working for a US organisation.

Likely is a forecast, I think. Probably is an informal guess.

I think that posting worrying about “decimating” is a bit daft. is patronising.

If someone said 'The UK army has been decimated', it could mean reduced by a tenth or seriously weakened, or both.

@RitaIncognita , we'll see 'could of' become acceptable, because That is how language evolves.

I just don’t think anyone actually uses it in that sense any more. If someone said on the news that the army had been decimated, I’d very much doubt that they meant it had been cut by 10%.

It’s the English who say “I was sat” not the Americans. Then they tell themselves it’s colloquial.

Possibly, but I doubt it.

On the other hand, at least one poster has used the construction "It was me" and my guess is that no one found it jarring or unacceptable.

One other thing. At least we Americans don't say "I was sat."

I love it when Americans say on the phone “This is she” (where we’d say “Speaking”). It sounds so quaint and charming.

These are not Americanisms. They are poor grammar. Poor English grammar.

Right: the weird thing is that these are (mostly) not Americanisms at all. I mean: American English and English English are obviously different and I am sure American Englush is degraded from the ideal. But not every poor turn of phrase in the UK is down to our insidious contamination of the mother tongue.

American usage here on Mumsnet is a bit like witchcraft or demonic possession. Its very scary and is happening right now to your loved ones. No one can stop it and no one seems to know how its transmitted. But its deadly!

American usage here on Mumsnet is a bit like witchcraft or demonic possession. It’s very scary and is happening right now to your loved ones. No one can stop it and no one seems to know how it’s transmitted. But it’s deadly!
🧑‍🍳😗👌

Nope, no demonising. I'll say it again. The dissatisfaction being expressed here - not by me anyway - is definitely not with Americans, or their brilliant creativity with language. I love to hear it and applaud them for it.

It's to do with protecting the 'flavours' of the language, just as the French might protect their myriad cheeses. British English has its own flavour. And when another country's cooler-sounding lingo becomes widespread, that unique flavour is lost.

Posters on Pedants' Corner are generally more attuned to these nuances than on general chat threads. We know most people finds these kinds of concerns baffling and that's why there's a self-mocking tone to the thread name. So on here we get to express these earnestly felt views, that in other contexts might be interpreted as small-minded, the height of rudeness or deliberately hurtful.

I haven’t noticed this. What I have noticed is Americans using probably to mean “roughly” or “around”

A young girl who was probably 10.

I met the President when I was probably 15.

I am not objecting to the thread or making fun if it. I am a bit of a pedant myself and love the English language and its many flavours and dialects. But I think the interesting thing about language is being a bit lost in the horror that words are borrowed or reborrowed across the ocean. Sometimes people are drawn to borrow because it allows them to access a nuance or tinker with a meaning that they otherwise can’t express.

At any rate “likely” is not an americanism. We don’t generally use it at all or if it is used it is used to mean something that is forecasted to be true while “probably” is more uncertain. They are not interchangeable.

I grew up in and still live in the Deep South. "Likely" is definitely used in speech in the Southern US.

I admit I am a New Englander.

I'll see your laying instead if lying and raise you the use of sat and stood instead of sitting and standing.

You were sitting/standing, not sat/stood.

then use it correctly for one of these "few opportunities" 🙄; there are already a variety of synonyms for 'obliterate', etc. the beauty of the English language is its extraordinarily wide vocabulary.

employ a word correctly or don't use it at all. the notion that illiterate usage supersedes accurate usage is extremely poor form 👎🏾

Don't get me started on the encroachment of the americanism 'zee' for 'zed'; for example in the current term 'Generation Z' (pronounced 'zee').

On the few occasions that I mention the North American 'boogie rock' musical combination ZZ Top, I have always referred to them as Z[ed] Z[ed] Top; until a recent switch to [Izzard] [Izzard] Top; I realise the latter is for hardcore pedants only 🤯

Who is the arbiter of whether its evolved meaning is incorrect or correct? I think you will find that dictionaries of the English language, including the OED, include the broader meaning. In addition, and more important, I don't think you will find many people who hear "decimate" and immediately think ten percent.

Incorrect 👎🏾

Could you clarify what is incorrect about it, @sidebirds ?

If someone said it, they could be using the original meaning only or the more recently accepted meaning, and which meaning they intended to use isn't clear.

You have disagreed with me about three points, and in each of them I wasn't wrong.

There are so many words in English whose current meaning is different from the original meaning. Are we going to call the use of these words in their current meaning incorrect? What a silly notion. ("Silly" is one of those words, by the way).

The OED (and other formerly highly regarded dictionaries) should set the standard. Corrupt usage such as the current popular 'decimate' gaffe should be treated with the contempt they deserve and entirely ignored; inclusion of such polluting illiteracy erodes trust. One might as well include such barbarisms as 'would of' and 'innit' simply because they are widely used.

As for your second point, it speaks for itself 🫡