Roger Mills wrote:
> Joe wrote:
>
>>He's right there. I got confused by my(Yorkshire) grandfather saying
>>[In?l&v], 'in the lav' or 'in the toilet. Which, in the UK, means 'in the
>>bathroom',
>
>
> Is this possibly a reduced form of "int"? (perhaps for earlier [Int@]?)
> which I seem to recall seeing in novels etc. that tried to depict
> non-standard UK dialects (I'm thinking principally of Stella Gibbons' "Cold
> Comfort Farm"-- it may be a send-up of a mish-mash of dialects. These stick
> in my mind:
> nowt for nothing (naught)
> summat for something, and the wonderful
> leetle brush for clettering the dishes
I thik "int" is supposed to be a shortened form of "isn't it".