Tl;dr: you’re on the Internet. Before authoritatively and incorrectly correcting someone, consider using it to verify that you’re actually correct first.
They responded to “US people say this” with “no, US people actually say this”. Then you said “Hey, there are places other than the US”.
Maybe before you correct someone you should check the thread you’re responding to.
Despite all that effort, he’s wrong as well. I’m born and raised in London, UK and we most certainly have differentiations. The description of preserves having elements of the real fruit is the same in the UK: I can go to the local supermarket right now and the shelf will have different sections for jams, preserves, and marmalades (which the person they were replying to were also correct in their description).
The thing I haven’t seen is American Jelly, as Jelly here is the same as Jell-O in the US.
When someone correctly says in the context of UK English “the yanks call (UK English A) (US English B)!” and they respond “no, we call (US English B) (US English B)” and proceeds to provide a US centric lecture of nomenclature, they tend to be contradicting them. On their own geographically correct usage of the word.
Corollary example also appropriate for the US. MtF person recently transitions and word is spreading.
Person 1: They even call Roy Martha.
Person 2: No, I call Roy Roy.
The only thing better than getting lectured on reading comprehension is being lectured by someone who didn’t comprehend the reading.
How convenient to leave out the third comment, the one you replied to.
The second comment was not just “higlighting a difference in US English versus English elsewhere”, it was claiming that US English calls jam jelly, and the third one corrected that claim.
Of course there are other English speaking countries besides the US, but the third comment was absolutely justified in correcting what the second comment claimed. It’s not like there was some person from the US who said that all English is like that, making your comment pretty unnecessary.
Yes, obviously the second comment was written by a non-US person. Nobody is trying to say otherwise.
Your original comment starts with pointing out that there isn’t just US English, and quite rudely so. Again, nobody is trying to say otherwise. The third comment was just a US person clearing up the non-US person’s conception about the usage of words in the US. So you pointing out that there are people outside of the US, who use words differently than people inside the US was entirely unnecessary. That’s what most people are taking issue with, I think.
Again, it’s kinda funny how much effort you’re putting into this. It feels a lot like you’re just trying to be correct in some way, instead of just admitting that your first comment was out of line. Welcome to my block list, and goodbye.
deleted by creator
They responded to “US people say this” with “no, US people actually say this”. Then you said “Hey, there are places other than the US”.
Maybe before you correct someone you should check the thread you’re responding to.
Despite all that effort, he’s wrong as well. I’m born and raised in London, UK and we most certainly have differentiations. The description of preserves having elements of the real fruit is the same in the UK: I can go to the local supermarket right now and the shelf will have different sections for jams, preserves, and marmalades (which the person they were replying to were also correct in their description).
The thing I haven’t seen is American Jelly, as Jelly here is the same as Jell-O in the US.
When someone correctly says in the context of UK English “the yanks call (UK English A) (US English B)!” and they respond “no, we call (US English B) (US English B)” and proceeds to provide a US centric lecture of nomenclature, they tend to be contradicting them. On their own geographically correct usage of the word.
Corollary example also appropriate for the US. MtF person recently transitions and word is spreading.
Person 1: They even call Roy Martha.
Person 2: No, I call Roy Roy.
The only thing better than getting lectured on reading comprehension is being lectured by someone who didn’t comprehend the reading.
Its kinda funny how much effort you put into this comment, despite the context pretty clearly being about US English
The literal first comment in the thread mentions a confusion of the non-American vs American “world” in reference to naming.
The next highlights a difference in US English versus English elsewhere.
I’d long to hear how the context is solely US English.
How convenient to leave out the third comment, the one you replied to.
The second comment was not just “higlighting a difference in US English versus English elsewhere”, it was claiming that US English calls jam jelly, and the third one corrected that claim.
Of course there are other English speaking countries besides the US, but the third comment was absolutely justified in correcting what the second comment claimed. It’s not like there was some person from the US who said that all English is like that, making your comment pretty unnecessary.
deleted by creator
Yes, obviously the second comment was written by a non-US person. Nobody is trying to say otherwise.
Your original comment starts with pointing out that there isn’t just US English, and quite rudely so. Again, nobody is trying to say otherwise. The third comment was just a US person clearing up the non-US person’s conception about the usage of words in the US. So you pointing out that there are people outside of the US, who use words differently than people inside the US was entirely unnecessary. That’s what most people are taking issue with, I think.
Again, it’s kinda funny how much effort you’re putting into this. It feels a lot like you’re just trying to be correct in some way, instead of just admitting that your first comment was out of line. Welcome to my block list, and goodbye.
deleted by creator