Looking back I have noticed a rapid Americanisation of our language over the last 30 years, though in truth it goes back much further, probably to the 1920s with the introduction of American popular music into Britain. The process accelerated in the 1940s with the posting of GIs during the Second World War and the advent of rock ’n’ roll in the mid-fifties. However the combination of computerisation and globalisation really made that trend inevitable. By the 1980s the financial world had universally adopted the American billion (milliard) in place of the British one. Slang expressions now became familiar with their American connotations, many of them of a crudely sexual nature. Pronunciations of words like research, schedule and harassment are now almost uniformly American. Those of us who cherish our own traditional ‘British English’ usages are now clearly fighting a losing battle. If there is one expression I really loathe it is the 'unisex' term 'you guys' - if the word 'guys' was used formerly, other than for Guy Fawkes's effigies, it referred solely to males, as do chaps and fellows. Restaurants now greet my wife & I with that awful expression instead of ‘Sir and Madam' or simply a normal welcome.
Indeed, it should be 'Greet my wife and me'. Object case.
Languages are not static phenomena. They are in a continual state of flux. The only constant is the recurrent horror of the older generation as they observe the neologisms of the young.
Relax Mr Millard. Embrace the new. And try to enjoy your meal out.
There is the same feeling of protectionism even stronger present in France. French people are very conservative when it deals avout language.
I used to share it. But now, I think it is past. To be attached like that to the purity of the language, the usages and the traditions is something totally delirious in this modern world. One can't withdraw into him self and his traditions, simply because he was born in that country instead of that one. The modern world has no borders, no closed lands and countries, it is past.
Foreign influences are an enrichment, not a threat.
I think this is more a complaint against modernity and informality than Americanization. Americans became more informal in their forms of address over the same period of change you are describing in the UK so I don't see this as an American innovation. Today I am much more likely to hear people addressed as Sir and Ma'am in the American South than I am in the UK. And the ubiquitous use of the very informal "mate" to address strangers is definitely not American (perhaps this makes it less objectionable to Millard).
I am very sorry to say, Mr Milliard, that you are fighting a losing battle. Having lived in several commonwealth nations where English is the native language I assure you the UK is not alone in abandoning traditional British English. Though, I'd like to ask you which part of the UK you consider to the rightful arbiters of what makes English British?
Are you only concerned with the Queen's English, or perhaps Home Counties English, or received pronunciation, or is there another region that tickles your fancy? Should we consider the English of Liverpool, Newcastle, Glasgow, or Devon to be correct and without American influence? Perhaps the smaller islands, such as Mann, Wight, or Jersey?
I am of course joking, but I wonder "if Su.Ki is correct in saying, "Relax Mr Millard. Embrace the new. And try to enjoy your meal out."
"guy" is informal when referring to a man or in the plural as people (although can still have a meaning of all men), so I don't see how it can be used formally.
At the end of the day, languages change. Things like using "literally" incorrectly or "of" instead of "have" are surely more frustrating than anything you mentioned.
Also, shouldn't it be "Restaurants now greet my wife and me..."?
And by the way, your exact same post you made of this a day ago isn't unavailable.
