Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site hou5h.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5g!hou5h!mgh
From: mgh@hou5h.UUCP (Marcus Hand)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: The Queen's English
Message-ID: <431@hou5h.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 22-Apr-85 16:03:48 EST
Article-I.D.: hou5h.431
Posted: Mon Apr 22 16:03:48 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Apr-85 07:17:08 EST
References: <395@tymix.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 20

"
With refernce to slang and jargon and UK/USA equivalence:
	"prick" is never used to refer to a male.
	Oh, yes it is, we used to use it frequently.

	there is no equivalent of "he is all wet".  Hmm, description
	of a person as being wet is fairly mild and has been around
	a long time.  Recently it has been used to refer to the
	more liberal minded members of the conservative party
	(eg "Pinko" Prior, Ted Heath, Linda Shorter, Alec Buchanan,
	Peter Walker, Tim Sainsbury etc.) who are regarded by the
	Thatcherite power-wielders as being wishy-washy fibreless
	softies.

	Oh yes, "fanny" doesn't mean what you think it means in UK,
	so be careful (its much stronger and refers to a part of
	female anatomy).  And "sod off" is stronger than "bugger off"
	which is stronger than "piss off" (substantially).  So there.
-- 
			Marcus Hand	(hou5h!mgh)