Re: [YAEUT] Lexical variation survey

Peter Collier wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: <li_sasxsek@...>
> To: <CONLANG@...>
> Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 1:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [YAEUT] Lexical variation survey
>
>
>>> [mailto:CONLANG@listserv.brown.edu] On Behalf Of R A Brown
>>
>>> > 19. the toilet facilities in a public place: bathroom, facilities,
>>> > ladies' room / men's room, lavatory, loo, restroom, toilet,
>>> washroom,
>>> > WC, john
>>> Informal: 'loo' or 'bog' (depending on company);
>>> formal: 'lavatory' or 'toilet'
>>> facetious: "little boy's room"
>>>
>>> Like most Brits, I have this quaint notion that a bathroom
>>> actually has a bath in it   ;)
>>
>> So I'm guessing you don't have real estate ads listing houses with
>> "2.5 baths" (the half is just a toilet and sink) like we do.
>
> Nope,
Indeed not.

> we'd have an "estate agent" advert "detailing" houses with
Yes, over here they're just "estate agents"; we don't bother with 'real'
and 'realtor' is not understood by many (most?) unless they have had
some exposure to 'Merkan.'

> "familiy bathroom" (i.e. main bathroom, typically toilet, sink and bath
> with shower) and "downstairs cloaks" ('cloakroom', i.e. small downstairs
> toilet and sink - e.g. for guests)
Yep - the 0.5 bathroom of the USA is a 'cloak(room)' as far as estate
agents are concerned. It's said to be derived from Public School (i.e.
posh private school) slang where 'cloak' = 'cloaca' (Latin for "sewer"  :)

> or "ensuite" (small bathroom off a
> bedroom, typically toilet and sink and, size permitting, a shower).
Yep - if it's a new house or a recent conversion, I would be somewhat
non-plussed if there were not a shower.

--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Frustra fit per plura quod potest
fieri per pauciora.
[William of Ockham]

Replies