The Difference Between The UK, England, And Great Britain

The Difference Between The UK, 

England, And Great Britain

 

The actual name of the sovereign state we are talking about is The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK). The United Kingdom is made up of the countries England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The confusion of the terms seems to revolve around the term “country” and the political powers that are perceived based on that word. While the four countries that make up the UK are considered separate in the minds of locals, and in certain sporting events, their powers for local law and control are devolved from the UK. Think of the 50 states of the United States, while each state has their own set of laws, they all are still under the power of the federal government. In the case of the UK, it is somewhat similar, though certain responsibilities are also implied, like healthcare and education, that are delegated to three of the four countries. The responsibilities that are delegated differ from one country to the next. England is the only country in which the UK does not devolve any powers and instead it is legislated directly by the UK government. When it comes to international politics, it is the sovereign nation of the UK that is recognized and not any of the four constituent countries.

The term “Great Britain” refers to the land mass that comprises England, Scotland, and Wales. Something that aids in the confusion as to the difference between Great Britain and the UK is that the term is sometimes internationally used as a synonym for the UK.  For instance, the UK’s Olympic team competes under the name “Great Britain” and the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) gives the UK the country codes of GB and GBR. This can be confusing given that the ISO also codes England, Scotland, and Wales as subdivision countries of the UK but Northern Ireland as a subdivision province. If you’re getting the impression that Northern Ireland is the red-headed stepchild of the UK, you may be right! (both figuratively and literally, if you believe the current statistics for redheaded populations that is)

The confusion over the definition of these four countries, in reference to the UK, is further muddied up in sporting competitions. There are several international sporting events, like the commonwealth games, and football competitions, in which each of the four has their own team, and do not compete under a unified national team. When competing under these conditions, their nations are referred to as “home nations”. Because each team is from a specific home country, it can lead some to think these countries have political autonomy as well. Given the inebriated thought processes attained during the enjoyment of these competitions, it’s not too hard to understand where this drunken confusion comes from.

If you’re curious when these unions between the countries that comprise the UK came about, it happened as follows:  England and Wales were joined in 1536.  Scotland and England were joined together in 1707, along with the previously joined Wales, to officially form the Kingdom of Great Britain.  Ireland decided to join up in 1801, at which point the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was formed.  In 1922, however, many of the Southern counties of Ireland decided to remove themselves from the union and the UK changed their name to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

So in summary:

• Great Britain = England, Scotland, and Wales
• UK = England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland (and the full name is the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”)
• England = Just the part of the island that is England

Bonus Facts:

• The “Union Jack”, the flag of the UK was initially made by superimposing the Flag of England with the Flag of Scotland in 1606.  When Ireland joined up in 1801, Saint Patrick’s Flag was added to the composition.
• The first peoples of the UK were the Picts who inhabited Briton around 10,000 BC. Two centuries later, they were driven north to Scotland by the Celts who promptly took over. The Romans then conquered in 45 AD and ruled for several more centuries. From around 600AD to around 900AD several peoples known as Angles, Saxons, and Jutes began to populate and govern the area. They became known as Anglo-Saxons. Then between 900 and 1400 came the conquering Vikings, then Danish, and finally the Normans. After that, in 1485 Henry Tudor claimed the English crown and the rest of British rule is an incestuous line of Kings and Queens of the monarchy leading to that handsome Prince William Mountbatten-Windsor and his lovely wife Kate!
• The United Kingdom ranks 28^th on the Human Development Index. This index is a comparative statistic that measures a countries “human development” based on factors like life expectancy, literacy, education, and standards of living, like income potential. Unfortunately for those Northern Ireland folks, their neighbors to the south who left the UK without them, living in the Republic of Ireland, rank 7th.
• The top five countries on the Human Development Index are: 1- Norway 2- Australia 3- Netherlands 4- United States and 5- New Zealand. The bottom five countries for human development are: Chad, Mozambique, Burundi, Niger, and The Democratic Republic of Congo. So based on these statistics, you can assume you lost the ovarian lottery if you were born in Africa somewhere!
• The United Kingdom has 14 overseas territories and 3 crown dependencies that do not make up part of the UK itself. Crown dependencies differ from territories in that they are the possessions of “The Crown”, and as such, sovereignty over them lies with the Queen (or King, as the case may be). The executive responsibilities for them are carried out by Her/His Majesty’s Government. The 14 overseas territories are under the sovereignty of UK itself, and not solely the ruling monarch.
• As of July 9, 2011, there are 195 independent sovereign states in the world. This includes independent Taiwan. So if you’re Chinese, you might consider that there are only 194, but who’s counting anyway? The last country to gain recognition as an independent state was the Republic of South Sudan in July of 2011.
• The UK does not have a single judicial system; instead, it has three separate systems. These systems are Northern Ireland law, Scots law, and English law. As you might expect, English law governs Wales as well. There are a few instances where there are laws that have jurisdiction throughout all of the UK, immigration law being one; further, employment law is recognized in the three countries of Great Britain proper. The UK has four separate educational systems, and four separate healthcare systems as a result of both being devolved to each separate country.
• London is not only the capital of England, but is also the capital of the UK.  The capital of Scotland is Edinburgh.  The capital of Wales is Cardiff.  Finally, the capital of Northern Ireland is Belfast.
• The national anthem of the UK is “God Save the Queen”, though the lyrics are changed to “God Save the King”  when the ruling monarch is a man.  One can only imagine the confusion and tumult at sporting events directly after the death of the ruling monarch where the gender of the heir is different than that of their predecessor and some people have heard of the death and others haven’t.

Why We Call the Seasons Summer, Autumn, Winter, and Spring

 Well, let's start :

“Winter” derives from the Proto-Germanic *wentruz, meaning winter.  This in turn probably comes from the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) *wed, meaning “wet”.  Alternatively, it may come from the PIE *wind-, meaning “white”.  Either way, the Proto-Germanic *wentruz gave rise to the Old English “winter” as the fourth season of the year and the name for the season has stuck around ever since.

 

“Spring”, referring to a season rather than the many other meanings of the word, first popped up in the 16th century.  Starting in the 14th century, this time of year was called “springing time” and then in the 15th century this got shortened to “spring-time”, and then further shortened in the 16th century to just “spring”.  The 14th century “springing time” came about in reference to plants “springing” from the ground and the like.  Before the season was called these things, it was called “Lent” in Old English.

“Summer” came from the Old English name for the season “sumor”, which in turn came from the Proto-Germanic *sumur-, which itself came from the Proto-Indo-European root *sam-, meaning summer. *sam- seems to be a variant of the Proto-Indo-European *sem- meaning “together / one”.

The origin of “fall” as a name for a season, rather than the more common “autumn”, is not perfectly clear, though it’s thought that it probably came from the idea of leaves falling from trees and many plants, particularly the contraction of the English saying “fall of the leaf”.  It first popped up as a name for a season in the later 16th century in England and became particularly popular during the 17th century, at which point it made its way over to North America.

Funny enough, calling autumn “fall” in England has since passed out of widespread practice, but has survived as a common name for the season in North America. This is not unlike how “soccer” was originally one of the most popular names for the sport in England around its inception and a long time after, which spread to North America, only to have the name die out in England, leading many to believe “soccer” is an “American” name for the sport, rather than one of the original names for it in England.

“Autumn” came to English via the Old French “autompne”, meaning autumn.  This in turn came from the Latin “autumnus”, also meaning “autumn”.  From here things get murky, but it’s thought “autumnus” probably came from an Etruscan word and is possibly related to the Latin “augere” meaning “to increase”.  Beyond that, nobody is quite sure why the season was originally called that.

Calling the season “autumn” in English first popped up in the 12th century, though was a rarity until around the 14th century.  It then began to pick up steam and became common in the 16th century, about the same time calling it “fall” popped up as the name for the season.  Before calling the season “autumn” or “fall” in English, it was called “harvest”.

Why the seasons are called “seasons”

The word “season” in this context comes from the Old French “seison”, meaning “sowing / planting”.  This in turn came from the Latin “sationem” meaning “sowing”. Initially this referred to actually sowing seeds, but later, as with the Old French “seison”, shifted definition to refer to the time period when you sow seeds, so literally “seed-time”.  “Season” in this sense in English popped up around the 13th century.  It was also around this time that “season” popped up referring to seasoning food- in this case from the Old French “assaisoner”, meaning “to ripen”.

 

the Origin of the Names of the Days of the Week

Why We Have a Seven Day Week and the Origin of the Names of the Days of the Week

 

Two of the earliest known civilizations to use a seven day week were the Babylonians and the Jews.  The Babylonians marked time with lunar months and it is thought by many scholars that this is why they chose a seven day week (though direct evidence of this being why they did this is scant). That being said, each lunar month was made up of several different cycles—on the first day, the first visible crescent appeared; on approximately the seventh, the waxing half-moon could be seen; on approximately the fourteenth, the full moon; on approximately the twenty-first, the waning half-moon; and on approximately the twenty-eighth, the last visible crescent. As you can see, each notable cycle is made up of about seven days, hence, the seven-day week.

You’ll notice I used the word “approximate” a lot in there.  This is because the moon phases don’t line up perfectly with this schedule.  As such, as far back as the 6th century BC (which incidentally is also around the time the Jews were captives in Babylon), the Babylonians would sometimes have three seven day weeks, followed by an 8-9 day week, presumably to re-synchronize the start and end of the weeks to match the phases of the moon.

In their normal seven day week, the Babylonians held the seventh day of each week as holy, much like the Jews did and still do.  However, the Babylonians also held the day to be unlucky.  Thus, similar to the Jews (but for a different reason- the unluckiness of the day), the seventh day had restrictions on certain activities to avoid dire consequences from the inherit unluckiness of the day. The final “seventh day” of the month for the Babylonians was a day of rest and worship.

By deistic decree, the Jews also followed a seven day cycle with the seventh day- the Sabbath-  to be a day of rest and worship.  In fact, the word “Sabbath” comes from the Hebrew “shabbath”, meaning “day of rest”, which in turn comes from the Hebrew “shabath”, meaning “he rested”- thus resting in homage to God resting on the seventh “day” after creating the universe. (Note: some biblical scholars believe the “day” here, in terms of six “days” to create the universe, one to rest, is more accurately translated as “period” or “interval” rather than a literal Earth day.  This is perhaps not unlike the “40 days and 40 nights” Jewish saying being a non-literal ancient Jewish expression simply meaning “a really long time”.)

Unlike the Babylonians, where it appears they were attempting to follow the lunar cycles with their seven day week, it isn’t known why the Jews picked seven days, outside of Christians and Jews of course believing that it was by the decree of God.

Whatever the case, the Ancient Romans, during the Republic, did not use a seven day week, but rather went with eight days.  One “eighth day” of every week was set aside as a shopping day where people would buy and sell things, particularly buying food supplies for the following week.

Rather than labeling the days of the week with actual names, at this time the Romans labeled them with letters, A-H.  You might think from this that the “H” was always the shopping day, but this isn’t correct.  You see, the calendar year did not divide evenly by eight.  Thus, the day of the week that was the day to go shopping changed every year, but they still often referred to days based on its proximity to the shopping day.

For reasons not entirely clear, within a century after the introduction of the Julian Calendar was introduced in 46 BC, the eight day week started to diminish in popularity in favor of the seven day week.  The full switch was not sudden, happening over centuries, and for a time, as the seven day week grew in popularity, both the seven and eight day weeks were used in Rome simultaneously.  Finally, after the popularity of the eight day week diminished to almost nothing, Constantine, the first Christian Roman Emperor, made the seven day week official in AD 321.  Due to the influence of both Rome and Christianity, this has stuck in most regions of the world ever since.

So now what about the origins of the names of the days of the week?  

Ancient Mesopotamian astrologers assigned each day the name of a god. The Greeks later called these days “theon hemerai”, or if that’s all Greek to you, “days of the Gods”. In a culture where days were consumed by religion, it’s only natural that the days of the week were made in homage to the gods thought to rule the lives of mortals. The days of the week follow the same trend as the months of the year, many of which (including January and March) are named after gods from several different pantheons.

The Romans, upon beginning to use the seven day week instead of the eight day, then adopted the names of the week to fit their own gods. The names of the week were then adopted by Germanic peoples. Despite Greek and Roman gods being the more popular and more well-known of the pantheons, it is largely the Germanic and Norse gods that have received the most credit and live on in the names of the days of the week today.

While different societies start the week on different days—usually Sunday or Monday—I’ll start with Monday, which was named for the moon. It could be translated as “Moon’s day”. This homage to the moon can be seen in several other languages as well. In Latin, it’s “dies lunae”, or “day of the moon”. In ancient Greek, “hemera selenes”, which means the same thing. In more modern languages, Monday is “lunes” in Spanish and “lundi” in French, both of which come from the root word for moon—”luna” and “lune” in each respective language.

Tuesday is the first to be named after a god. It was named for Tiu, or Twia, a lesser-known god of war and the sky from the English/Germanic pantheon. He is also associated with the Norse god Tyr, who was a defender god in Viking mythology. However, Tuesday does not translate the same in other languages. In Latin, it’s “dies Martis” or “Day of Mars” and in ancient Greek it’s “hemera Areos” or “day of Ares”. Both Mars and Ares were gods of war like Tyr and they lent their names to day of the week translations for other modern languages. Tuesday is “martes” in Spanish and “mardi” in French, both named for the Roman god Mars.

Wednesday can be translated as “Woden’s day”. Woden, associated with the Norse god Odin, was the chief god and leader of the wild hunt in Anglo-Saxon mythology. Directly translated, “woden” means “violently insane headship”, and does not put one in mind of the best of gods. Unlike the other days of the week, the gods named in the Latin and Greek days of the week – Mercury and Hermes —  are not associated with violent leadership, but with travel, commerce, and theft. Both are messenger gods. It is for Mercury that Spanish and French decided to name Wednesday—”miercoles” and “mercredi” respectively.

Thursday is one of the easiest days to translate, meaning “Thor’s day”. Named for the Norse god of thunder and lightning. Thursday is also associated with Jupiter in Latin (“dies Jovis”) and Zeus in Greek (“hemera Dios”). All three gods are known for their storm-creating abilities, but while the English language took Thor as its god for Thursday, Spanish and French adopted Jupiter instead, naming Thursday “jueves” and “jeudi” which have roots in Jupiter.

Friday is associated with Freya, the Norse goddess of love, marriage, and fertility. The Latin, “dies Veneris”, and the Greek, “hemeres Aphrodite”, call upon the goddesses Venus and Aphrodite instead. The latter two goddesses are also patrons of love and beauty, and all three goddesses are called upon in womanly matters like fertility and childbirth. Following the trend of the other days, Spanish and French adopted Venus for Friday rather than Freya, naming their days “viernes” and “vendredi”.

Saturday in English derives from “Saturn’s day” which was taken from the Latin, “dies Saturni”. Saturn was a Roman god and, over different periods of time, associated with wealth, plenty, and time. The day in Spanish and French (“sabado” and “samedi” respectively) was named simply as it is the Jewish Sabbath- “sabado” deriving from the Latin “sabbatum”, meaning “Sabbath”, and “samedi” deriving from the Old French “samedi”, which in turn comes from the Latin “dies Sabbati”, meaning “Day of the Sabbath”.

Sunday is “Sun’s day”, translated in both Latin (“dies solis”) and Greek (“hemera helio”) as “day of the sun”. Interestingly, in Spanish and French (“domingo” and “dimanche”) it is more closely translated as “Lord’s day” or “Sabbath day”, pointing to more the Christian/Jewish God.

ENJOY !

 

The Origin of the English Alphabet

Often considered one of the more difficult languages to master thanks to the incredible amount of inconsistencies in the language, it should come as no surprise that the development of the modern English alphabet involved several languages, hundreds of years and a variety of conquers, missionaries and scholars.

 

Origins of Alphabetic Writing
Dating back nearly four thousand years, early alphabetic writing, as opposed to other early forms of writing like cuneiform (which employed the use of different wedge shapes) or hieroglyphics (which primarily used pictographic symbols), relied on simple lines to represent spoken sounds. Scholars attribute its origin to a little known Proto-Sinatic, Semitic form of writing developed in Egypt between 1800 and 1900 BC.
Building on this ancient foundation, the first widely used alphabet was developed by the Phoenicians about seven hundred years later. Consisting of 22 letters, all consonants, this Semitic language became used throughout the Mediterranean, including in the Levant, the Iberian peninsula, North Africa and southern Europe.
The Greeks built on the Phoenician alphabet by adding vowels sometime around 750 BC. Considered the first true alphabet, it was later appropriated by the Latins (later to become the Romans) who combined it with notable Etruscan characters including the letters “F” and “S”. Although ancient Latin omitted G, J, V (or U)*, W, Y and Z, by about the third century, the Roman alphabet looked very similar to our modern English, containing every letter except J, U (or V)* and W.
[*V and U have a complicated shared history. Both were used throughout the Middle Ages, although they were considered a single letter until quite recently.]
Old English
The history of writing in Britain begins with the Anglo-Saxons in the fifth century AD. With ties to Scandinavia and other North Seas cultures, ancient Anglo-Saxon writing, called futhorc, was a runic language. Flexible, new runes were routinely added such that, although it first appeared in England with 26 characters, by the time of its demise (by the 11^th century AD), it had 33.
In the seventh century AD, the Latin alphabet introduced by Christian missionaries had begun to take hold. By 1011, a formal list of the Old English alphabet was made and included all of our present letters except J, U (or V)* and W. The ampersand and five uniquely English letters, designated ond, wynn, thorn, eth and ash, were included.
As far from Modern English as Public Enemy, Old English continues to be taught in high schools and colleges when our young people are forced to grapple with things like Beowulf (translated):

HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum, 
þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon, 
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon! 
oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum, 
monegum mægþum meodosetla ofteah, 
egsode eorlas, syððanærest wearð
feasceaft funden; he þæs frofre gebad,
weox under wolcnum weorðmyndum þah,
oð þæt him æghwylc ymbsittendra
ofer hronrade hyran scolde, 
gomban gyldan; þæt wæs god cyning! 
Ðæm eafera wæs æfter cenned 
geong in geardum, þone God sende 
folce to frofre; fyrenðearfe ongeat, 
þe hie ær drugon aldorlease 
lange hwile; him þæs Liffrea, 
wuldres Wealdend woroldare forgeaf, 
Beowulf wæs breme — blæd wide sprang— 
Scyldes eafera Scedelandum in. 
Swa sceal geong guma gode gewyrcean, 
fromum feohgiftumon fæder bearme . . .

Middle English
Shortly after the Old English alphabet was first set down, the Normans invaded (1066 AD). English as a language was relegated primarily to the low born, with the nobility, clergy and scholars speaking and/or writing in Norman or Latin.
By the 13^th century when writing in English began to become more prominent again, the language reflected two centuries of Norman rule. The Old English letters thorn and eth were replaced by “th”; wynn eventually became u-u or “w”; and the other English letters were discarded.
This form of the language, called Middle English, while still difficult at times, is comprehensible to the modern English reader. Recall Geoffrey Chaucer’s Wife of Bath from Canterbury Tales (translated):

Experience, though noon auctoritee
Were in this world, were right ynogh to me
To speke of wo that is in marriage;
For, lordynges, sith I twelf yeer was of age
Thonked be God, that is eterne on lyve,
Housebondes at chirche-dore I have had five-
For I so ofte have ywedded bee-
And alle were worthy men in hir degree.
But me was toold, certeyn, nat longe agoon is,
That sith that Crist ne wente nevere but onis
To weddyng in the Cane of Galilee,
That by the same ensample, taughte he me,
That I ne sholde wedded be but ones.
Herkne eek, lo, which a sharp word for the nones,

Modern English 
With the introduction of the printing press (invented by Johann Gutenberg in 1448) to Great Britain in the mid 15^th century by William Caxton, English became more standardized and modern English appeared. Sometime in the mid-16^th century, V and U were split into two letters, with U becoming the vowel, and V, the consonant. In 1604, Robert Cawdrey published the first English dictionary, the Table Alphabeticall, and about this time, J was added to create the modern English alphabet we know today.  And the rest, as they say, is history.

 

The Origin of Language

 

It is virtually impossible to know which language developed first, but that doesn’t mean linguists haven’t taken a good whack at it. The main problem is that scientists think language probably developed around 100,000-200,000 years ago. That’s around when modern humans, Homo sapiens, developed with the same skull structure—with the implication of the same brain functionality—and a similar vocal structure to humans today.

 

Of course, it’s likely that groups of human-like animals had different types of languages well before then. Where sentient beings gathered together, some form of language would have been a necessity to communicate, even if it was just a few grunts like those popularly uttered by cavemen in movies.

Discounting these, the origin of modern language is still largely unknown. The first language could have been similar to one spoken today, or languages could have changed so much that they bear no resemblance to the first known language, and may not have even been spoken at all, rather relying on gestures or even whistles, such as with Silbo Gomera, the whistling language. Unfortunately, language predates the written word, and without historical texts to look back on, linguists can only guess at what the first language.

There are a few criteria that people use to decide on “the first known language.” One way people determine the first known language is by looking at the first written language, which happens to be Egyptian or Sumerian. There are both Egyptian and Sumerian texts dating back to around 3200 BC. There were, of course, many other languages spoken at that time all over the world—it’s just that these two communities seem to have developed a written language first, or at least wrote their languages on material that was able to persevere through the wear-and-tear of time. These texts are the first real evidence of language, and the only thing that linguists can prove with any certainty.

As for spoken language, there are many, many theories that have been developed over the years. For the purposes of this article, we’ll look at the argument over polygenism and monogenism—that is, figuring out if many languages developed independently in different parts of the world at the same time, or if all languages stem from one proto-language a la the Tower of Babel. (If you’re not familiar, the story goes that everyone in the world initially spoke the same language. When they resolved to build a tower to Heaven, God decided to scatter humans across the world and give people different languages to speak so that they couldn’t communicate with one another.) If you believe in monogenism, then there actually was a true “first language.” But if you believe in polygenism, there were many different “first languages” that developed around the same time.

Both theories rely on a lot of speculation. With monogenism, linguists have been tracing the roots of modern languages but can only go as far back as written languages before things get murky. There have also been studies based on genetics; there is a correlation between genetic diversification and the diversification of languages that were spoken over time. That would mean that when the human population was small, there could have been just one language. (And, indeed there is a known instances that the human population diminished so much that all of us can trace our ancestry through one woman who lived about 150,000-200,000 years ago, known as Mitochondrial Eve). The various studies come to different conclusions about how reliable this method of determining the first language is, making it somewhat controversial.

Monogenism largely fell out of favour in the 19^th and 20^th centuries when polygenism—the thought that all races developed independently of each other—was developed. Linguistically speaking, polygenesis depends on the idea that all languages developed independently of each other based on the environment that humans found themselves in. Monogenism argues that this is unlikely, especially since many languages can be traced back to “mother” languages.

What linguists can tell is that most of the 5000 languages spoken today on Earth can be grouped into branches. So, Spanish and Italian are grouped together with French and Romanian and are called “Romance languages.” English, together with German and Dutch, are “Germanic languages.” Both Romance and Germanic come together with Celtic, Greek, and Indian languages (among others) under the banner “Indo-European Languages.” As far as history is concerned right now, Indo-European is the oldest known family of languages, going back as far as Anatolian around the 20th-19th century BC. Some argue that the Afroasiatic family of languages may be older, but the earliest estimates there only go to about the 16th century BC.

There are, of course, many other branches of language. Japonic, Amerindian, Paleo-Siberian—the list goes on. Languages can usually be traced to their various branches, but the problem is finding out if they share one common ancestor, or “trunk” so to speak, which would give us the first language (if you accept monogenism, that is!).

Whether languages came from one language—called “proto-Human”—or many languages, it’s quite likely that our languages today simply changed and developed over time as the need for names and words for different things arose. Languages change and grow all the time, and that’s something that all linguists can agree on. For instance, in the last few years words like “senioritis,” “flash mob,” and “woot” have appeared in the Oxford English Dictionary for the first time.

With new words emerging all the time, it’s not hard to see how language has changed from Chaucer’s Middle English to textspeak in such a short amount of time. Now expand that to many millennia and it’s no wonder  linguists haven’t yet come to a consensus on what the first language might have been.

 

The Origin of the English Names of Colors

 

Dating back centuries, the names of our everyday colors have origins in the earliest known languages. According to linguists:

There was a time when there were no color-names as such . . .  and that not very remote in many cases, when the present color-words were terms that could be used in describing quite different qualities [including] gay, lively, smart, dashy, loud, gaudy . . . dull, dead, dreary . . . tarnished, stained, spotted, dirty, smeared . . . faint, faded [and feeble].

As different societies developed names for colors, across the globe, isolated cultures went about naming the colors, but weirdly, they all generally did it in the same order. Called the hierarchy of color names, the order was generally (with a few exceptions): black, white, red, green, yellow, and blue with others like brown, purple and pink coming at various times afterward.

Recent research in this area has demonstrated that this hierarchy matches humans reaction to different frequencies in the visible spectrum; that is, the stronger our reaction to that color’s frequency, the earlier it was named in the culture; or as Vittorio Loreto et al. put it:

The color spectrum clearly exists at a physical level of wavelengths, humans tend to react most saliently to certain parts of this spectrum often selecting exemplars for them, and finally comes the process of linguistic color naming, which adheres to universal patterns resulting in a neat hierarchy…

So, like other cultures, English words for the colors generally followed that same pattern, with black and white coming first, and purple, orange and pink coming last.

The Parents of Modern English

Although a number of the languages discussed in this article are self-explanatory, these three benefit from a brief description:

Proto-Indo-European (PIE) – Known as the common ancestor of all of the Indo-European (Europe, India, Iran and Anatolia) languages, it was spoken up to, perhaps, the 3^rd or 4^th millennium BC.

Proto-Germanic – A child of the PIE, Proto-Germanic (2000 BC-500 BC) was an ancestor of the Saxon, English, German (duh), Norse, Norwegian, Dutch, Danish, Icelandic, Faroese, Swedish, Gothic and Vandalic languages.

Old English – This early form of English, also sometimes called Anglo-Saxon, was used in England and Scotland from about 400 AD-1100 AD.

In addition, many of the words from these and other early languages are only assumed to have existed. In the study of the origin of words (etymology) these “presumed words” are generally marked with an asterisk (*). For convenience, they are referred to as “written” although it is doubtful that they ever were.

Black

Black derives from words invariably meaning the color black, as well as dark, ink and “to burn.”

Originally meaning, burning, blazing, glowing and shining, in PIE it was *bhleg. This was changed to *blakkaz in Proto-Germanic, to blaken in Dutch and blaec, in Old English. This last word, blaec, also meant ink, as did blak (Old Saxon) and black (Swedish).

The color was called blach in Old High German and written blaec in Old English. One final meaning, dark (also blaec in Old English) derived from the Old Norse blakkr.

White

White began its life in PIE as *kwintos and meant simply white or bright. This had changed to *khwitz in Proto-Germanic, and later languages transformed it into hvitr (Old Norse), hwit (Old Saxon) and wit (Dutch). By the time Old English developed, the word was kwit.

Red

In PIE, red was *reudh and meant red and ruddy. In Proto-Germanic, red was *rauthaz, and in its derivative languages raudr (Old Norse), rod (Old Saxon) and rØd (Danish). In Old English, it was written read.

Green

Meaning grow in PIE, it was *ghre. Subsequent languages wrote it grene (Old Frisian), graenn (Old Norse) and grown (Dutch). In Old English, it was grene and meant the color green as well as young and immature.

Yellow

Thousands of years ago, yellow was considered to be closely related to green, and in PIE it was *ghel and meant both yellow and green. In Proto-Germanic, the word was *gelwaz. Subsequent incarnations of German had the word as gulr (Old Norse), gel (Middle High German) and gelo (Old High German). As late as Old English, yellow was written geolu and geolwe

Blue

Blue was also often confused with yellow back in the day. The PIE word was *bhle-was and meant “light-colored, blue, blond yellow” and had its root as bhel which meant to shine. In Proto-Germanic, the word was *blaewaz, and in Old English, it was blaw.

English also gets some of its words from French, and blue is one of them. In Old French (one of the vulgar Latin dialects whose height was between the 9^th and 13^th centuries AD) blue was written bleu and blew and meant a variety of things including the color blue.

Brown

Derived from the Old Germanic for either or both a dark color and a shining darkness (brunoz and bruna), brown is a recent addition to our language. In Old English it was brun or brune, and its earliest known writing was in about 1000 AD.

Purple

This word also skipped the PIE and seems to have sprung up in the 9^th century AD, in Old English as purpul. Burrowed from the Latin word purpura, purple originally meant alternately, “purple color, purple-dyed cloak, purple dye . . . a shellfish from which purple was made . . . [and] splendid attire generally.”

Orange

This color’s name derives from the Sanskrit word for the fruit naranga. (Yes, the color orange was named after the fruit, not the other way around). This transformed into the Arabic and Persian naranj, and by the time of Old French to pomme d’orenge. It was originally recorded in English as the name of the color in 1512.  Before then, the English speaking world referred to the orange color as geoluhread, which literally translates to “yellow-red.”

Pink

One of the most recent colors to gain a name, pink was first recorded as describing the “pale rose color” in 1733. In the 16^th century, pink was the common named to describe a plant whose petals had a variety of colors (Dianthus), and it originally may have come from a Dutch word of the same spelling that meant small.

 Did you know this before or is it the first time you hear about it ??

The Differences Between British and American English

The Differences Between 

British and 

American English

 

Most people are well aware of some of the more obvious differences between British and American English. For instance, American English omits the “u” in colour, neighbour, honour, etc. Most people also know that a lot of words mean different things: a boot is the trunk of your car, a jumper is a sweater, and thongs are flip-flops. But there are some subtle differences between the two dialects that you might not have noticed at first glance.

 

This is by no means a comprehensive list of every grammatical quirk between the two versions of English, just a selection of differences that I thought were fun or interesting based on my experiences as an American living abroad where British English is the dominant language. I think I should also point out that with British TV shows on American screens and vice versa, not to mention the interaction we’re able to enjoy on forums across the internet, it’s possible some British or American English has slipped into your vocabulary, so some differences are starting to disappear.
First, speakers of British and American English have different preposition preferences. These little words are so small you might not have noticed the differences when talking to your British/American friends. Each example is grammatically correct, but one or the other might sound a little strange to you depending on where you’re from:

British English: I will come home at the weekend.
American English: I will see her on the weekend.

BE: He studied history at university.
AE: She studied biology in college.

In terms of past-time adverbs such as yet, just, or already, Brits usually use the present perfect verb tense and Americans use the past simple verb tense. Again, both forms are correct, and you can get the same meaning across either way:

BE: Have you phoned her yet?
AE: Did you call her yet?

BE: Have you already been to the library?
AE: Did you already go to the bank?

British English speakers will also use the word “got” more than American English speakers. Where Brits will say “have got,” Americans will typically say “have.” Like this:

BE: I’ve got to go now.
AE: I have to go now.
BE: I’ve got five siblings.
AE: I have five siblings.

Even when asking a question, the “do” form of “have” is much more common in American English, while British English typically uses “got” for specific situations:
BE: Have you got a sister?
AE: Do you have a sister?
BE: Have you got time to write this down?
AE: Do you have time to write this down?

Interestingly, when Americans do use “got,” the “have” and “do” forms are often mixed up between the question and answer, while in British English they are more consistent. Take this example from the BBC:
BE: We’ve got a new car! – You have?
AE: We’ve got a new car! – You do?

There are a lot of differences in regular and irregular verbs in British and American English. That means that we tack on various endings on some verbs in one dialect that we don’t in others. A couple of the verbs that are irregular in British English are burn, learn, and smell. These words are all regular in American English. For example:
BE: She burnt the toast.
AE: She burned the toast.
BE: The garden smelt of roses.
AE: The garden smelled of roses.

There are also a couple of verbs that are irregular in American English that are regular in British English, including dive, fit, and wet.
BE: She dived into the lake.
AE: She dove into the lake.
BE: He wetted the paintbrush.
AE: He wet the paintbrush.

The use of the verbs “have” and “take” are also a little different. In British English, they prefer “have,” while in American English, they prefer “take.” For instance:
BE: I’m going to have a nap.
AE: I’m going to take a nap.
BE: She is having a bath.
AE: She is taking a bath.

In addition to cutting out letters, sometimes Americans cut out entire words—at least when their sentences are compared to British sentences. In this case, I’m talking about “can” and “could.” When using perception verbs like see, hear, and smell, British English often calls for “can” and “could,” while American English ignores them entirely, like this:
BE: I could hear Jane talking in the other room.
AE: I heard Jane making breakfast in the kitchen.
BE: She can see a rainbow in the sky.
AE: She sees a rainbow in the sky.

Then there are those words that are left with an “s” or not depending on which dialect you speak. One such word is the shortened form of mathematics, which is “maths” in British English and “math” in American English. The reasoning for this one is that “mathematics” is plural, so the shortened “maths” in British English should be too. In American English, it’s shortened, but cutting off the “s” as well. Another example of this is toward vs. towards, which is one of the most common mix-ups:
BE: She walked towards the light.
AE: He moved toward the door.

There are even a few differences in punctuation between British and American English. First, it is more common to use the single quotation mark in British English, whereas in American English it is more common to use the double quotation mark. Second, in American English, people include punctuation inside quotation marks, while in British English the punctuation goes outside of the quotation marks (unless it’s part of the quote.) For instance:
BE: ‘She went to the park’, said John.
AE: “She went to the park,” said John.

BE: John said, ‘She went to the park.’ (this is part of the quote so it stays inside the quotation marks)
AE: John said, “She went to the park.”

Then, of course, there are the multitude of words that are used differently in each dialect, along with a few different phrases. One I found particularly interesting while polling a few of my friends was the phrase for asking if someone would like you to take them in your car to a different location:
British/Australian English: Would you like a lift?
American English: Would you like a ride?
Some Parts of Canada: Would you like a drive?

Beyond grammatical quirks, here are some words and their corresponding meanings depending on which side of the pond you’re on:

British English	American English
Nappy	Diaper
Trolley	Shopping cart
Torch	Flashlight
Boot	Trunk
Thongs	Flip-flops
Pants	Underwear
Trousers	Pants
Rubber	Eraser
Biscuit	Cookie
Lift	Elevator
Bumbag	Fanny pack
Car park	Parking lot
Candyfloss (Fairyfloss in Australia)	Cotton candy
Chemist	Drugstore
Cot	Crib
Drink-driving	Drunk driving
Fish finger	Fish stick
Fringe	Bangs
Holiday	Vacation
Lorry	Truck
Pavement	Sidewalk
Postcode	Zip code
Pram	Stroller
Queue	Line
Touch wood	Knock on wood
Z (zed)	Z (zee)

Do you know of other difference? 

Please share them in the comments below!