Testy Copy Editors

Our new website is up and running at testycopyeditors.org. This board will be maintained as an archive. Please visit the new site and register. Direct questions to the proprietor, blanp@testycopyeditors.org
It is currently Mon Nov 30, 2020 3:44 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: today in history
PostPosted: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Homebush NSW Australia
For those of you who do the history columns. The flag adopted in 1654 is the union flag - the union jack
is its name at sea.
I'd be interested to know if AP stylebook gives this matter a mention.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 11:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2004 12:01 am
Posts: 52
Location: carlsbad, new mexico
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Paul Wiggins:
For those of you who do the history columns. The flag adopted in 1654 is the union flag - the union jack
is its name at sea.
I'd be interested to know if AP stylebook gives this matter a mention.
<hr></blockquote><p>The only references to "union" in the stylebook is to capitalize when referring to Northern states during the civil war and United Auto Workers union, et cetera. Also no mention of "Old Glory", but there is a half-mast and half-staff entry. Hope this helps.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 1112
Location: An undisclosed alpine meadow
AP hid Old Glory under the nicknames entry:
... Capitalize without quotation marks such terms as Sunshine State, the Old Dominion, Motown, the Magic City, Old Hickory, Old Glory, Galloping Ghost.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 12:01 am
Posts: 887
Location: U.S.A.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Paul Wiggins:
For those of you who do the history columns. The flag adopted in 1654 is the union flag - the union jack is its name at sea. I'd be interested to know if AP stylebook gives this matter a mention.<hr></blockquote><p>As noted previously, the AP Stylebook is silent on the matter. However, AP's fallback source -- Webster's New World -- defines "Union Jack" as "the national flag of the United Kingdom." "Union Flag" doesn't warrant an entry.<p>But don't be too hard on us Americans. Apparently, even Commonwealth citizens don't make the distinction between "Union Flag" and "Union Jack" in common usage. Not that the difference isn't good to know.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Homebush NSW Australia
I'm a republican (note the lower case r). The interest comes because the Union Flag is involved crucial events establishing European sovereignty in Australia and New Zealand history. Also that minor matter of it occupying the upper left of our flags. Ps can't recall previous thread on this, my memory is enervated of late. Pps the Commonwealth of Nations does not have citizens., bit the Commonwealth of Australia does, the term can be confusing when reading our press from overseas.<p>[ April 11, 2004: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]</p>


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 12:01 am
Posts: 102
Location: A compromise between Man's Euclidean determinations and Nature's beguiling irregularities.
A related question: An history professor of mine, who remains an Englishman despite all the temptations to belong to other nations, insisted that he wasn't a citizen of Great Britain. Rather, he said, he is a subject. I've never heard a Briton make the distinction since. Anyone know the difference?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Homebush NSW Australia
Leaving the usage of Great Britain aside, his passport now says citizen where it used to say British subject. The distinction is important because until New Zealand changed its passport laws the holder was a New Zealand citizen but a British subject. Kiwis are no longer British subjects. The change came about after tightening of migration requirements after Britain's entry into the EEC ( a precursor of the European Union).


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:01 am
Posts: 101
Location: Inner Baltimore
quote :o riginally posted by Drew4AU:
A related question: An history professor of mine, who remains an Englishman despite all the temptations to belong to other nations, insisted that he wasn't a citizen of Great Britain. Rather, he said, he is a subject. I've never heard a Briton make the distinction since. Anyone know the difference?<p>I think the difference is the implied authority of the Crown. One may be a citizen of a nation, but subject of the realm of a king or queen. It would seem that the conditions are not mutually exclusive in the UK, where the monarch still holds (at least theoretical) powers over the individual through the "Royal Prerogative." Your professor might be either a proud royalist or a bitter republican, but he does seem to be invoking the Queen. As the notion of Empire wanes and that of the European Union gains prominence, the distinction probably grows less important, which could be why you haven't heard it since.<p>I'm hardly qualified to talk about this, of course, but I do find the dual personality of British nationalism intriguing, much in the same manner as the game of cricket: it's intricate, arcane, long in development, and taken very seriously by its participants.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Homebush NSW Australia
They do.
A colleague caused outrage many years ago by reminding reporters to write Britain instead of United Kingdom or Great Britain on the grounds that the place being written about was neither united nor great.
The staff whinged about it at dinner parties for years as an example of the tyranny of the desk in question.
Oh, by the way, he was a Brit.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:01 am
Posts: 2266
Location: New Jersey
I believe that the following can be attributed to John Cleese, when asked a couple years ago what makes Great Britain "great":<p>"First, we can speak English. Second, when we hold a world championship sporting event, we invite other countries to participate. Third, when we meet our head of state, we only have to go down on ONE knee."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:01 am
Posts: 2266
Location: New Jersey
Oh, and a question for Paul. I've heard Australians derisively refer to Britons as "Poms," but my Googling has failed to uncover the origin of the term. Would love to be enlightened.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Homebush NSW Australia
Here's the Macquarie Dictionary's stab at it:<p>Pommy = Pommie Colloquial noun (plural Pommies) (also lower case) 1. a person who is resident in or has migrated from the British Isles,especially England: *we'd all gone right down to Fremantle on one of his biglorries to pick up a family of Pommies and their furniture who'd just come out from Home. - T.A.G. HUNGERFORD, 1983 adjective 2. British, especially English: *What cheer? Oh that's Pommy-talk --English for `How's it cobbers?' - XAVIER HERBERT, 1938 Also , Pom [abbrev. of POMEGRANATE, rhyming slang for immigrant] <p>********** The etymology is disputed, my view is that no one knows it.<p>******* No self-respected copy editor would ever use it (preferring Brit if needed)
except on sports stories.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: today in history
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:01 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Homebush NSW Australia
See also this page of World Wide Words and the web search tip posted by .me.<p>[ April 12, 2004: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]</p>


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

What They're Saying




Useful Links