Sounds like something out of Swift.Salmoneus wrote:Those interested in politics may encounter the Ministry of the Chits, in the late 17th century.
ETA: Seriously, one of them was named "Lord Godolphin"? HOW IS THAT NOT SATIRE?
Sounds like something out of Swift.Salmoneus wrote:Those interested in politics may encounter the Ministry of the Chits, in the late 17th century.
I just had to look this up. Apparently, it's Cornish.linguoboy wrote:Seriously, one of them was named "Lord Godolphin"? HOW IS THAT NOT SATIRE?
I've heard this used as a brief note on a small piece of paper.Vijay wrote:Yeah, the only chit I know of is the kind that comes from Hindi [t͡ʃɪˈʈʰːi] (and only in British English with RP).
Exactly, that's the one that comes from Hindi. In Hindi (and some other Indo-Aryan languages, at least), it usually means 'letter' (as in snail mail).richard1631978 wrote:I've heard this used as a brief note on a small piece of paper.Vijay wrote:Yeah, the only chit I know of is the kind that comes from Hindi [t͡ʃɪˈʈʰːi] (and only in British English with RP).
But no. "Ministry" here doesn't mean "department", it means the government as a whole. It's the equivalent of US "administration" - if you search Wikipedia for "May administration", for instance, you'll be redirected to "May ministry" - we're currently in the second May ministry.richard1631978 wrote:I've heard this used as a brief note on a small piece of paper.Vijay wrote:Yeah, the only chit I know of is the kind that comes from Hindi [t͡ʃɪˈʈʰːi] (and only in British English with RP).
I think they were used as an acknowledgement for goods received or sold, like a receipt, which makes a ministry of chits less far fetched, if it was supposed to be in control of keeping records of government spending & such.
What I like best about this extremely proportionate response if about how it's free of any trace of defensiveness.Salmoneus wrote:[and Sidney Godolphin's name is usually stressed on the second syllable. I'd also like to remind the chuckling Americans that they are from a country whose recent Presidents have included the surnames "Clinton", "Bush" and "Trump". Not to mention, back in time, "Fillmore", "Johnson", "Harding", and "Johnson" again because you hadn't had enouh Johnson yet. And "Polk", "Coolidge" and "Truman". And, ridiculously, "Hoover". And first names have included "Grover", "Millard", "Calvin", "Herbert", "Quincy", "Franklin", "Rutherford", "Abraham", "Zachary", "Woodrow", "Franklin" (again!), "Bill", "Ronald", "Lyndon", "Ulysses"... and, heaven help us, "Dwight"...]
sidNEYgodolphinSalmoneus wrote:Sidney Godolphin's name is usually stressed on the second syllable.
Not to nitpick but Quincy was John Quincy Adams' middle name. Also, I'm not sure what's supposed to be strange about Calvin, Herbert, Franklin, Abraham, Zachary, William, Ronald, or Ulysses: they're all pretty common names, or at least were at the time those particular presidents were born. And Johnson is such a common name that it's not terribly surprising we had two of them (who were unrelated, incidentally).Salmoneus wrote:[and Sidney Godolphin's name is usually stressed on the second syllable. I'd also like to remind the chuckling Americans that they are from a country whose recent Presidents have included the surnames "Clinton", "Bush" and "Trump". Not to mention, back in time, "Fillmore", "Johnson", "Harding", and "Johnson" again because you hadn't had enouh Johnson yet. And "Polk", "Coolidge" and "Truman". And, ridiculously, "Hoover". And first names have included "Grover", "Millard", "Calvin", "Herbert", "Quincy", "Franklin", "Rutherford", "Abraham", "Zachary", "Woodrow", "Franklin" (again!), "Bill", "Ronald", "Lyndon", "Ulysses"... and, heaven help us, "Dwight"...]
They're just so ridiculous!Zaarin wrote: Also, I'm not sure what's supposed to be strange about Calvin, Herbert, Franklin... Zachary... or Ulysses
You might as well go around naming children "Yahweh" or "Christ"...Abraham
Ronald is a perfectly acceptable name, for a plumber, or a youth centre activities manager. It's just having a Head of State called Ron that's a bit hard to take seriously. Likewise with Bill ["William", though, is fine].William, Ronald
It kind of is, actually - even the 2nd most common name (in the US*) is still pretty rare. 1:163 Americans, apparently, have 'Johnson' as a surname, making it kind of weird that you've had two of them in a sample of only 44 people, particularly given that it's such a historically 'black' surname*. The most common American surname, for instance, is "Smith", and you've never had one of those. In fact, only four Presidents have held ANY of the 20 most common surnames, and two of them were Johnsons - of the 1 President since 1900 to have had a common surname, 100% have been Johnsons. Indeed, even beyond the long odds of this happenin by chance in fair elections, there's probably an active factor against it: America largely prefers to select its politicians from within its entrenched aristocracy, who typically don't share the same names as ordinary Americans.And Johnson is such a common name that it's not terribly surprising we had two of them (who were unrelated, incidentally).
Ronald is a perfectly acceptable name, for a plumber, or a youth centre activities manager. It's just having a Head of State called Ron that's a bit hard to take seriously. Likewise with Bill ["William", though, is fine].
I'm not following. Is having a HoS with a commoner name/surname okay or not okay in a modern Western state after all?America largely prefers to select its politicians from within its entrenched aristocracy, who typically don't share the same names as ordinary Americans.
Which names are considered acceptable in the US includes a great many names that have completely different connotations in Britain. Americans are well-known for using surnames as first names, for example.Pole, the wrote:I'm not following. Is having a HoS with a commoner name/surname okay or not okay in a modern Western state after all?
The point isn't about having class connotations associated to names/surnames. The point is about having class connotations associated to the office of HoS / HoG.Perhaps it's different in Poland, but in the UK, things like words and names can have connotations and expected places of residence.
As did the Polish PM in 2007-2014. Still, more people took offense in him supposedly being German than in him having a funny first name.Heck, the current president has the same first name as a famous cartoon character that's a duck, and no one seems to bat an eyelid at that here at least.
In Britain, I'm not sure anything is free of class connotations.Pole, the wrote:The point isn't about having class connotations associated to names/surnames. The point is about having class connotations associated to the office of HoS / HoG.Perhaps it's different in Poland, but in the UK, things like words and names can have connotations and expected places of residence.
Yep! This strikes me as a bit weirder tbh because he's the only Polish person I've ever known to have that as a first name and because the name comes from Gaelic. Then again, there's also a retired Indonesian tennis player with the same name, so...As did the Polish PM in 2007-2014.Heck, the current president has the same first name as a famous cartoon character that's a duck, and no one seems to bat an eyelid at that here at least.
Maybe to anglophones, but I'd dare to say that the comic appeal of 'Bob' is more universal.Vijay wrote:"Dick" is an inherently amusing name.
Yes, they are utterly ridiculous.Io wrote:I'm surprised Sal didn't mention Dick or Mitt, OK neither was POTUS but still close enough and I'd imagine their names sound quite amusing to Britons.