F.A.N.Y.P.A.C.K.E.
« previous post | next post »
[SORRY for previously writing "the Economist" instead of "the Guardian" "-)…]
Steven Collins' January 9 cartoon from the Guardian starts with a man's sudden displacement after he places a simple fast-food order:
He ends up in a secret war room — because simply failing to use an available Americanism is enough to enlist him in the Resistance:
(Click on the images to show larger versions.)
And the conclusion:
The Wikipedia entry (see also here) indicates that fanny pack itself is an Americanism. Perhaps the joke behind the cartoon is that Resistance Is Futile?
Zeroing in on the engagement map, which lists some other skirmishes:
And overall, this is another hint that the culture of prescriptivist peeving lives on the UK.
Interestingly, the Wiktionary entry for get doesn't yet make note of the "can I have" / "can I get" issue.
Jerry Packard said,
August 24, 2026 @ 8:09 am
Not to mention the usual ‘apartment’ for ‘flat’, ‘elevator’ for ‘lift’ and ‘trunk’ for ‘boot.’
Francois Lang said,
August 24, 2026 @ 8:36 am
Continuing in the automotive vein, there's also `lorry' for `truck' and `bonnet' for `hood' and no doubt many more!
Robot Therapist said,
August 24, 2026 @ 9:44 am
I suppose "please may I have…" is too much to hope for.
The wiktionary entry for fanny pack suggests that the UK equivalent is "bum bag", but the photo on that entry gives the lie to it, as it's not worn on the bum. It is in fact covering the (UK) fanny.
Fritz Newmeyer said,
August 24, 2026 @ 9:55 am
The British-North American exchange of words and phrases works in both directions. Here's a list of 30 briticisms that have recently (last generation) found their way into American English:
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19929249
Some examples given are 'bum', 'cheeky', 'frock', 'twit', 'mobile' (phone), 'wonky', and 'knickers'. I would add 'top up' (a tank) and 'chat up' (a possible love interest). I heard them for the first time in a stay in the UK in the 1970s and only years later on the other side of the Atlantic.
Carlana said,
August 24, 2026 @ 9:55 am
The joke is that “fanny” is vulgar in British English but not American English, so the American name for a waist purse is amusingly obscene name to Brits.
Philip Taylor said,
August 24, 2026 @ 9:59 am
"this is another hint that the culture of prescriptivist peeving lives on the UK" — and long may it continue so to do.
Timothy Rowe said,
August 24, 2026 @ 10:07 am
The Wikipedia article only shows the waist belt over the “(UK) fanny” because it is shown on a woman. Men wear them too, and are not conventionally equipped with the appropriate anatomy to wear one over our ‘(UK) fanny’.
Olaf Zimmermann said,
August 24, 2026 @ 10:12 am
Well, you wouldn't say "Can I have you a coffee?" on either side of the pond, that's for sure.
This being said, I wholeheartedly recommend Jane Walmsley's Brit-Think Ameri-Think (the 1986 edition; the later one is utterly naff) and a visit to a London pub called Just Brahms. The Grauniad would have been more likely to write about it than the Economist.
Mark Liberman said,
August 24, 2026 @ 10:44 am
@Jerry Packard & François Lang:
The cartoon's assumption, I think, is that flat, lift, boot, lorry, bonnet, etc. are safe, while maybe bangs, mom, math, gotten, etc. are in danger of adoption. But "soccer"???
David L said,
August 24, 2026 @ 12:01 pm
Since the Economist is a magazine with an international audience, I took the cartoon to be a dig at Philip Taylor and his fellow peevers for their insular and frequently inaccurate beliefs.
Jerry Packard said,
August 24, 2026 @ 12:10 pm
@Mark
I noticed during broadcast of the World Cup that a few of the announcers seemed to be undecided and torn between ‘football’ and ‘soccer.’ It seemed like in general the term used was ‘soccer’, maybe because I was watching USA-affiliated broadcasts.
Bob Ladd said,
August 24, 2026 @ 12:54 pm
I agree with MYL's assumption that flat, lift, etc. are not in any danger, and the FANYPACKE people are zeroing in on Americanisms that are actually being adopted.
I'm not sure I buy David L's assumption about what the point of the cartoon is; Stephen Collins's cartoons are generally so surrealistic that it's often hard to decide what they're getting at. And anyway, the Economist, international audience or not, is resolutely British in some of its preferred usages. I have been told on good authority that when the omicron variant of the Covid virus emerged, a significant amount of time in an editorial meeting was devoted to whether to have podcasters pronounce it OM-icron like everyone else in the world, including the Greeks themselves, or to use the venerable but archaic British public school pronunciation oh-MIKE-ron.
Y said,
August 24, 2026 @ 12:54 pm
They skipped the part where another trap door opened to a lower level, where he is scolded for saying "Can I…" instead of "May I…"
Y said,
August 24, 2026 @ 12:59 pm
Incidentally, the only audio Wiktionary provides for the pronunciation of fanny pack is of a speaker from Southern England.
John Lavagnino said,
August 24, 2026 @ 1:18 pm
Link points to the Guardian not the Economist. You can find two publications a lot farther apart in cogno-intellectual space, but even so….
[(myl) Abject apologies for this slip of the brain — fixed now…]
Philip Taylor said,
August 24, 2026 @ 4:42 pm
Had the customer said "Can I get a sausage roll", I am certain that any well-trained Greggs employee would have responded "No, you most certainly cannot. The only people who are allowed to get sausage rolls in this establishment are Greggs front-of-house staff. You may have a sausage roll, if you wish, but only after one of our staff has got it for you from the display cabinet".
Daniel Deutsch said,
August 24, 2026 @ 4:42 pm
Ben Zimmer on “table.” The meanings aren’t just different—they’re opposite.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-a-table-changes-shape-as-it-crosses-an-ocean-11545928203
JPL said,
August 24, 2026 @ 6:12 pm
Philip: What about the other one, Mark's, that says the culture of peeving lives on the UK, as if it were a national fungus? (At least your quote was accurate.)
HTI said,
August 24, 2026 @ 7:09 pm
I always go for the good ol’ “please might your humble servant have …”.
HTI said,
August 24, 2026 @ 7:15 pm
On second thought I should want to opt for “please might your humble servant be blessed with …”, so as not to sound too brusque.
Jonathan Smith said,
August 24, 2026 @ 8:24 pm
^ this newfangled ungrammatical use of "please" is annoying though — surely "if it please you" or something
Richard Hershberger said,
August 25, 2026 @ 3:50 am
My penance for my sins is to read Facebook language peevery groups. British peeving about perceived Americanisms is very much alive and well, with about the expected level of thoughtfulness and factual accuracy.
Peter Grubtal said,
August 25, 2026 @ 5:01 am
It goes beyond peevery with me to hear "mom" everywhere : it sounds so infantile, condescending and presumptuous, and even the English "mum" I only use in an informal context with family and friends.
grover jones said,
August 25, 2026 @ 9:46 am
@Jerry Packard
And of course "soccer" is originally British, not American!
CuConnacht said,
August 25, 2026 @ 10:21 am
I am informed by one who should know that "mom" is standard in Birmingham and environs (and not a new import).
Benjamin E. Orsatti said,
August 25, 2026 @ 11:14 am
Just out of curiosity, if "mom" is too Yankee, and "mum" is passé, what do people across the pond go around calling their primary matrilineal ancestor — "ma"?
Peter Grubtal said,
August 25, 2026 @ 12:52 pm
Birmingham England is renowned for its accent, and that "mum" might sound like "mom" there might be possible.
And where I am "mum" is certainly not passé but standard. "ma", in my anglophone circles is scarcely used.
It's the usage: where I move (south of England, London, continental expats) even amongst friends it's just not done to refer to other peoples' mothers, even in an abstract, non-personal context, as mum/mom/ma.
Philip Taylor said,
August 25, 2026 @ 3:06 pm
Well, in the circles within which I move, "How’s your mum ? Is she feeling any better ?" would be a perfectly normal way of enquiring about a friend's mother. And of course one’s spouse’s / partner’s / w-h-y’s mother can also be (and usually is) addressed as "mum" (or in my case, má, as in Chào, má.). My paternal grandparents were addressed as "Mother" and "Father" rather than "Mum" and "Dad", but I think that this would be very uncommon these days.
Benjamin E. Orsatti said,
August 25, 2026 @ 3:36 pm
Ooh, we have more data points now (thanks, Philip!).
What about the thing you used to see in British sitcoms from the '70's and '80's — where the married couple refer to each other as "Mother" and "Father" when speaking to their child, e.g., (Father:) "Pippa, Nigel, come inside, Mother's just put the kettle on!"? Is that still a standard term of address, or has it "aged out" of common parlance?
Chris Button said,
August 25, 2026 @ 4:37 pm
Association Football, Rugby Football, American Football, Aussie Rules Football, Gaelic Football…
They're all football and played on foot (unlike Polo on horses).
Cliff Arroyo said,
August 26, 2026 @ 12:55 am
In case anyone is confused….
In the US 'fanny' refers to the buttocks (either sex).
In the UK it refers to female genitalia.
You're welcome!
Philip Taylor said,
August 26, 2026 @ 3:21 am
I think, Benjamin (and I emphasise "think") thar referring to a fellow parent as "Mother" or "Father" when speaking to a child might still the norm in a few upper-class families but most would express your sentence as "Pippa, Nigel, come on in, [your] Mum’s just put the kettle on!".
Barbara Phillips Long said,
August 26, 2026 @ 7:33 am
@ Fritz Newmeyer —
My impression is that "frock" has gone in and out of popularity in the U.S. In the 1930s, there was a regional clothing business in south-central Pennsylvania that had "frocks" in its name:
In 1935, the former Rummel, Himes & Co. building at the corner of West Garfield and South Fayette streets became U-Wanna-Wash Frocks Inc. The new owners operated a successful company that made men’s suits, women’s blouses, overalls and shirts. The building quickly expanded and began making women’s and girl’s housecoats, and employed thousands of men and women (with the largest percentage of the workforce being women) over the next 50 years.
In 1988, U-Wanna-Wash Frocks moved from Shippensburg to Newville.
https://www.shipnc.com/free_announcements/article_5624c7fc-6bea-11eb-837b-6b0bdbcf9750.html
Philip Taylor said,
August 26, 2026 @ 8:52 am
(and continuing the Mum / Dad / Mother / Father theme, as used in the U.K.), there is also the issue of register. Compare and contrast "Look what Dad's brought home for dinner" to/with "I don't know what your father's going to say when he learns that your probation officer has had to call in the police …".
Kate Bunting said,
August 26, 2026 @ 11:02 am
My maternal grandparents (born in the 1880s) were known to have never, within their children's memory, addressed one another as anything but 'Mother' and 'Father'. This was unusual even in the 1960s. Grandpa caused some surprise when, in hospital in his 80s, he began a letter 'Dear Mother'!
I've never been a sports fan, but I'm sure 'soccer' was in fairly common use in Britain when I was young. I certainly didn't learn the word from the American use of it.
Fritz Newmeyer said,
August 26, 2026 @ 5:47 pm
@Barbara Phillips Long
The Ngram viewer shows alternating peaks and troughs for use of the word 'frock' in both US and UK English. For the most part, when the word is out of favour in one variety of English, it is in favour in the other. However, both have increased in usage in this century, but in the US much more than in the UK.
Gav said,
August 27, 2026 @ 7:02 am
Around here, until fairly recently that is, "football" meant rugby union. The other kind was "soccer". Rugby league was never spoken of. [Our son, who is a naturalised Londoner, takes issue with me over this, but not to the extent of our falling out.]
"Mother" is, of course, "Mam".
Philip Taylor said,
August 27, 2026 @ 8:27 am
"Rugby league was never spoken of" — what, not even when discussing the late, great, sadly and deeply missed, Sir William John "Billy" Boston ?
Gav said,
August 27, 2026 @ 9:05 am
Not in the day. My grandfather's generation (and possibly Sir Billy himself as a young man) took a dim view of those going north, but since the professional game has more or less formalised boot money we have to find something else to be hypocritical about.
David Marjanović said,
August 27, 2026 @ 2:26 pm
I've met a nearly millennial Texan who addresses her mother as "Mother", "Mom" or by first name seemingly at random.
SlideSF said,
August 27, 2026 @ 4:10 pm
@Philip Taylor I am from the USA and a bartender by trade. If someone asks me if they can get a beer, I answer in a similar vein as you suggest:"I'm sorry, but this isn't a self-service bar." Worse yet, and it really irks me is "I'll take a [whatever]." I answer the same way, but what I really want to say is "You certainly will not!" I'm not usually a language peever, but this construction strikes me as both lazy and rude. What I find odd is that almost no one has any idea what I am talking about.
Viseguy said,
August 27, 2026 @ 6:16 pm
@Philip Taylor:
My late wife addressed her parents as "Mother" and "Dad" — and thereby hangs a family saga.
Nathan said,
August 27, 2026 @ 9:35 pm
This American is bemused by the "can I get".
I don't hear that here, and honestly it strikes me as British.
"Can I please have" is, I think, what most of us say.
Michael Watts said,
August 27, 2026 @ 9:58 pm
"Can I get [whatever]" is definitely normal in American English as a way to order in a restaurant. It is interchangeable with "can I have [whatever]" and will not appear foreign (whether British or otherwise).
I would have to disagree that most of us insert "please" in our restaurant orders.
What's the issue that it should be noting?
Michael Watts said,
August 28, 2026 @ 1:40 am
If you're from the USA, you've got no excuse. As you are well aware, the relevant sense of get in this construction is Merriam-Webster's sense 12:
Compare the fairly common question what did you get for Christmas?
Michael Watts said,
August 28, 2026 @ 1:44 am
Ah, forgive me. The Merriam-Webster link is to the definition of take, another verb that possesses exactly the sense SlideSF would like to pretend it doesn't.
The relevant sense of get, by contrast, is Merriam-Webster's sense one:
JPL said,
August 28, 2026 @ 2:30 am
What about the friendliest form of request, friendlier than the polite forms for magically coming into possession of something behind the counter, "(Hi!) Gimme a sausage roll!"? Of course not said in a gruff, angry and abrupt way, more like, "Gimme a hug!". Especially popular in hurly-burly urban contexts. (It was somebody I know's favorite way of doing it.) (The less friendly version would be, "Can you give me a ….?")
JPL said,
August 28, 2026 @ 2:33 am
There's also, "May I fetch a sausage roll from behind there?"
Tom Dawkes said,
August 28, 2026 @ 3:05 am
On 'get', my daughter, a teacher of English in Italy, pointed out years ago that 'get is almost a universal replacement verb.
"I got up at 7, and when I got to the bathroom, I got washed. When I got back to the bedroom, I got out my suit and a short and a new pair of socks and got dressed. When I got down to the kitchen, I got out the cereal and milk……" and so on
Bob Ladd said,
August 28, 2026 @ 3:31 am
The complete set of comments here on "can I get" really summarize peeving very nicely:
A new (?) usage arises; it drives some people crazy, while others don't notice or don't see what the fuss is about; among those who hate it, one group blames some other group, while that other group blames the first group. While we're in the middle of this one, it's too early to be sure, but it seems likely that by 2050 or 2070 both forms will be used and no one will notice any more.
As for Viseguy's "Mother and Dad", I remember noticing this seemingly asymmetrical usage a long time ago when I was about 8 years old and a cub scout. The cub scout manualat the time described all kinds of "achievements" that the eager could take on to earn points, badges, etc., and completion of the achievement had to be parentally certified in a form that specified "Mother or Dad sign here". I noticed this because in my family it would have been "Mum or Dad".
(NB "Mum" was – and I think still is – common in New England (the American one, not the Australian one), where my parents both grew up. Unlike "Mom", however, and unlike British "Mum", I don't think it was ever used as a common noun ("my mum"). Can any current New Englanders comment?
Philip Taylor said,
August 28, 2026 @ 5:32 am
What is "a short", Tom ? (As in "I got out my suit and a short and a new pair of socks …").
V said,
August 28, 2026 @ 7:18 am
David Marjanović: "I've met a nearly millennial Texan who addresses her mother as "Mother", "Mom" or by first name seemingly at random."
I do the same when addressing my mother in Bulgarian, and am also "nearly millennial" (as in almost too old to be one). I use "мамо" [mom-vocative] more than майко (more formal, think "mother", always vocative) or her name (_almost_ always vocative, sort of neutral in formality). My father (her husband) calls her by her name in the nominative more often than in the vocative, but it's almost random, anything else would sound weird (I think it's fifty-fifty if _I_ call _him_ by name, and it's almost always in the vocative). I also address her as "grandma-vocative" (бабо) when in a conversation with her and my nephews, but use the nominative when I'm trying to get their attention about something they should do with her. I use "grandpa" in the same context more rarely. My brother and his spouse mostly use "grandma" and "grandpa" rather than names when talking to the children, and they're younger than me — proper millennials.
Viseguy said,
August 28, 2026 @ 4:55 pm
A youthful Rowan Atkinson gets peeved:
https://youtube.com/shorts/8teQK6rkO8w
Michael Watts said,
August 28, 2026 @ 5:29 pm
That one surprises me because, in a formal printed context, I would expect "mother or father".
Wrt forms of address and reference, as a small child I was taught to call three grandparents "Grandma [first name]" or "Grandpa [first name]" and the other "Grandpa [last name]". I believe this was due to my mother's being more or less estranged from her father rather than to any preference on his part. In a letter the salutation would have used title and name; in oral direct address I don't recall using anything. It's not so often that you have to use someone's name while speaking to them.
My parents used these terms when speaking to me about my grandparents.
I should note as a practical matter that being taught to use diminutive addresses ("Auntie ___" / "Daddy") caused significant problems for me as a teenager, when I was too old to continue using them but no other forms of address had been made available. Teach your children to use names that they can keep using indefinitely.
V said,
August 28, 2026 @ 7:17 pm
"It's not so often that you have to use someone's name while speaking to them."
I do that quite often, but only when speaking to people I am very familiar with. It's a term of endearment.
Chas Belov said,
August 28, 2026 @ 9:00 pm
@SlideSF: The customer's grammar is always right, even if the customer isn't always right.
Also from SF, though an import. And if that's lazy grammar, so be it.
Chas Belov said,
August 28, 2026 @ 9:01 pm
Well, so long as you are capable of parsing what they said.
Chas Belov said,
August 28, 2026 @ 9:22 pm
For that matter, ¿why wouldn't you expect informal grammar (I dispute that it's lazy) when someone is ordering a beer? It's not an office email or a doctoral dissertation.
Tye S Power said,
August 29, 2026 @ 10:14 am
Also, maybe it's because my kids are a certain age, but no one has pointed out the connection to Phineas and Ferb, popular on American TV about 20 years ago. Every show has a scene where their stuffed animal, Perry the Platypus, comes alive, opens a trap door, and descends to a secret headquarters with a leader that looks a lot like the guy in the Guardian cartoon. Perry becomes Agent P and gets a mission along with other agents. The whole show was full of intelligent wordplay including humorous acronyms and initialisms.
V said,
August 29, 2026 @ 2:16 pm
Tye S Power : Now that you point it out, I do see the similarity (Phineas and Ferb).
V said,
August 29, 2026 @ 5:00 pm
Michael Watts "I should note as a practical matter that being taught to use diminutive addresses ("Auntie ___" / "Daddy") caused significant problems for me as a teenager, when I was too old to continue using them but no other forms of address had been made available. Teach your children to use names that they can keep using indefinitely"
I find that very liminal in a mid-80s sense.
Philip Taylor said,
August 30, 2026 @ 1:40 pm
I never felt embarrassed addressing my aunts and uncles as "Auntie …" and "Uncle …" (and my parents as "Mum" and "Dad", my grandparents as "Nanny" and "Grandad" or "Grandma" and "Grandpa", and so on) all the while they remained alive. But I addressed (and address) and referred to (and refer to) my wife's aunts and uncles solely by given name if they were/are younger than me, of the same age as me, or only a little older than me, reserving "Auntie" and "Uncle" only for the very few who were/are clearly of at least one generation senior to mine.
Vulcan With a Mullet said,
August 30, 2026 @ 2:01 pm
Adding to the data sample here… American, 56 years old, from Atlanta, and "can I have" sounds more correct to me as well. I am sure I have used both before and never really considered the difference. I would never say "may I" however!
Andrew Usher said,
August 30, 2026 @ 2:17 pm
It's clear the people differ on that. I think a safe rule would be that if an adult isn't going to be comfortable using it (mutatis mutandis) in third-person reference, then he might not be in first-person address, either. This comment:
is most definitely not helpful.
Philip Taylor said,
August 31, 2026 @ 7:07 am
As few (if any) here are mind-readers, Andrew, I would respectfully suggest that what you refer to by "that" will not necessarily be clear to your readers,
Andrew Usher said,
September 2, 2026 @ 7:48 am
I apologise if I genuinely caused inconvenience, but it's normal to use 'this' and 'that' is fairly vague ways, to be clarified by context and not normally requiring 'mind-reading'. Here I meant the topic your comment (the last post as I was writing mine) was addressing: namely, how adults feel comfortable addressing family members. My reply directly addressed that topic, and I didn't see it (though I am not claiming I can't err in such judgements) as difficult to figure out.
Philip Taylor said,
September 3, 2026 @ 4:05 am
Well, without wishing to labour the point, it is usually impossible to know which was the most recent comment at the time that someone else started to compose a reply, so I personally find that including the name of the author and quoting a small fragment of the prose on which one is commenting can help to clarify on which particular element of a thread one is commenting. See, for example, my most recent reply to "Rodger C" in another thread.
Andrew Usher said,
September 6, 2026 @ 9:49 pm
That's a deficiency in the blog software. Although I admit it looks bad when a post is skipped over like that, I think it usually shouldn't impair comprehension, and I deliberately omitted the attribution as I was directly following the post referenced, and if not for the inserted post would look redundant.
Jerry Friedman said,
September 13, 2026 @ 11:15 pm
Richard Hershberger wrote:
Meanwhile, Americans younger than me, such as my students and people on NPR, are writing "grey" and saying "one-off" and pronouncing "organization" etc. and "fertile" etc. with PRICE, and nobody peeves a word. At least spare us "lieutenant"!
Oh, well, mustn't grumble.
Jerry Friedman said,
September 13, 2026 @ 11:29 pm
Never mind "one-off". I mentioned it just to comply with Richard's comment about the factual accuracy of peeving. The ngram results are astonishingly similar.