Ugly words

[spot]

I just saw "burglarized" in the Los Angeles Times.

What on earth happened to burgled?

[LarsMac]

spot;1514006 wrote: I just saw "burglarized" in the Los Angeles Times.

What on earth happened to burgled?


I don't think "burgled" ever really took root here.

Burgarized goes back to the mid-19th Century.

[xfrodobagginsx]

spot;1514006 wrote: I just saw "burglarized" in the Los Angeles Times.

What on earth happened to burgled?


The only place I have heard the word burgled is in the Hobbit cartion movie.

[Bruv]

It's better than 'home invasion'...................it is a burglary isn't it ?

Anyway........Susie Dent says many Americanisms are from old English and that we.....the English have moved on, but the zee's and stuff are native to real English.

I find it hard, but her word is good enough for me.

[Wandrin]

Burglarize - the condition of having been burgled.

It makes sense to me, although I just made that definition up.

[Mark Aspam]

Well, I will be 77 later this month, and I have never heard "burgled" used other than in a comedic sense, and very rarely, in the USA.

"Burglarized" is the common term here.

[Bruv]

You have far too many zees of there.

Is a 'Home invasion' the same as to be burgalized ?

[Wandrin]

Bruv;1514050 wrote: You have far too many zees of there.

Is a 'Home invasion' the same as to be burgalized ?


"Home Invasion" implies that the residents were home at the time of the crime and usually involves weapons. Burglaries imply that the residents were not present at the time of the crime.

[Bruv]

Wandrin;1514051 wrote: "Home Invasion" implies that the residents were home at the time of the crime and usually involves weapons. Burglaries imply that the residents were not present at the time of the crime.


We would say we got burgled while we were home......cheeky buggers.....how dare they gadzooks.....then beat them with our brollies.

Very few burglars come armed here.

Trust you lot to go over the top.

[LarsMac]

Wandrin;1514051 wrote: "Home Invasion" implies that the residents were home at the time of the crime and usually involves weapons. Burglaries imply that the residents were not present at the time of the crime.


Yup. Don't know of many burglars that like to go in a home while the lawful residents are around.

[xfrodobagginsx]

Wandrin;1514027 wrote: Burglarize - the condition of having been burgled.

It makes sense to me, although I just made that definition up.


In the US we just say Robbed, not Burgled or Burglarized.

[magentaflame]

"Break and enter" here. What is burglary?

Burglary is essentially the entering, or remaining in a building as a trespasser, with the intent of committing an offence. The offence was defined as breaking and entering into a dwelling at night under the common law, whilst the same act committed during daylight hours was referred to as housebreaking. However, burglary is now defined under statute law, with all Australian states and territories making the act a criminal offence. Which is of course, little surprise.

Using s 76(1) of Victoria’s Crimes Act as a guide, a person commits the offence of burglary if the following elements are evident:

“(1) A person is guilty of burglary if he enters any building or part of a

building as a trespasser with intent-

(a) to steal anything in the building or part in question; or

(b) to commit an offence-

(i) involving an assault to a person in the building or part in question;

or

(ii) involving any damage to the building or to property in the building or

part in question…”

Despite the use of the word, ‘he’ in the Victorian legislation, a female is just as liable as a male, to be found guilty of burglary. Further interesting observations in the definition of burglary, can be found in s 109 of New South Wales’ Crimes Act, which defines burglary as entering a dwelling-house with intent, and s 213 of the Northern Territory’s Criminal Code, which states that the offence is an “unlawful entry of buildings.”

What are the elements that make up the offence burglary?

Generally speaking, the constituent parts of burglary, is the intent to commit an offence in a building, and the act of entering into, said building. In R v Dugan, the leading judgment by Street CJ, stated:

“Its ingredients, as the section states, for presently relevant purposes, are first entering a building, and secondly, with intent to commit a felony in the building… The actus reus is the act of entry. The mens rea is the intent to commit the robbery in the building. The coincidence in point of time of these two ingredients is what is encompassed within the Act.”

What is aggravated burglary?

If an offence has been committed while a person was carrying an offensive weapon, then the act is generally referred to as, aggravated burglary. Again, using Victoria’s Crimes Act under s 77(1) as a reference, the features of aggravated burglary are:

“(1) A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he or she commits a burglary

and-

(a) at the time has with him or her any firearm or imitation firearm, any

offensive weapon or any explosive or imitation explosive; or

(b) at the time of entering the building or the part of the building a

person was then present in the building or part of the building and he

or she knew that a person was then so present or was reckless as to

whether or not a person was then so present.”

Even if granted permission by the owner to enter into a home, a person may still be guilty of an offence

It’s not unusual for a person who goes on a holiday to ask a neighbour to drop into their place, and to look after their home while the person is away: But what happens if the neighbour has instead robbed the residence? Well, this is exactly what transpired in Barker v The Queen, and the High Court ruled, that a person will be considered as a trespasser after being given permission to enter the premises, steals from the person once inside the dwelling, and while also possessing the requisite intent – may be found guilty of an offence.

The judges in Barker stated:

“A person who enters the premises of another with the permission or consent of that other does not enter as a trespasser unless the permission or consent is vitiated by fraud or duress.”

[Bruv]

xfrodobagginsx;1514059 wrote: In the US we just say Robbed, not Burgled or Burglarized.


Right................................OK

[Mark Aspam]

xfrodobagginsx;1514059 wrote: In the US we just say Robbed, not Burgled or Burglarized.WRONG!

Robbery is open, robbing a bank at gunpoint or a person on the street at night.

Burglary is done in secret, breaking into a house or business at night or stuffing merchandise under your sweater in a store.

[spot]

I'm trying to remember where I heard the Aztec equivalent of the Ten Commandments earlier this week.

Don't steal, don't lie and never be lazy.

I think that has to be the pinnacle of ethics, I'm totally impressed. And it applies equally to people and governments.

As far as I'm concerned, if someone wants to seethe a young goat in its mother's milk I have no objection whatever.

[Ahso!]

I think "Volumizing" is an ugly word. It is found on hair blower boxes.

[LarsMac]

One that we have been hearing lot in the last year around work is "Operationalizing"

WTF?!?!?

[magentaflame]

what's with yanks and the letter 'z'????? (pronounced 'zed' btw)

[magentaflame]

Ahso!;1514113 wrote: I think "Volumizing" is an ugly word. It is found on hair blower boxes.


I have soooo many questions about you at this point. lol

[Bruv]

magentaflame;1514129 wrote: what's with yanks and the letter 'z'????? (pronounced 'zed' btw)


Sorry but it's not zed it's zee................they don't even get that right.

[Ahso!]

magentaflame;1514131 wrote: I have soooo many questions about you at this point. lolI was successful in spite of myself. I'm leaving five copies behind. I'll leave it there.

[magentaflame]

Abcdefghijk.......elemenopee.....qrstuv...wxy...zed!!!

[Bruv]

magentaflame;1514141 wrote: Abcdefghijk.......elemenopee.....qrstuv...wxy...zed!!!


Yes but you speak English they don't.

[magentaflame]

yeah it's what happens when you don't side with the french lol.

[FourPart]

As I understand it the original settlers to the New World would have been extremely limited in literacy skills. It is not surprising, therefore, that they went on to spell things phonetically, such as by leaving the 'u' out of certain words such as colour, flavour, savour, etc. It is nothing to do, as previously claimed that English moved on, whereas American didn't. In fact the entire opposite is true. You only need to look at the original French spellings, from where the English versions originated. They have the 'u's. The same goes for 'z'. English has always been a strange one for spelling. For instance, I have never understood the need for a letter 'Q', when it has the identical sound as a 'K'. Why, too, is there so often an additional 'C' with a 'K'? Why 'Quick' instead of 'Kwik'?

[magentaflame]

FourPart;1514157 wrote: The same goes for 'z'. English has always been a strange one for spelling. For instance, I have never understood the need for a letter 'Q', when it has the identical sound as a 'K'. Why, too, is there so often an additional 'C' with a 'K'? Why 'Quick' instead of 'Kwik'?


I can tell you why...... slap up the side of the head from my mother if you spell it as Kwik.

I think Quebec might have a problem with it. Although they would move up the line of the olympic march into a stadium.

[spot]

They'd be Kebek, Kanada.

Definitely get rid of Q and C. Entirely obsolete.

I'd not rubber-stamp Kwibek, that's just not how it's ment to sound.

[Wandrin]

spot;1514173 wrote: They'd be Kebek, Kanada.

Definitely get rid of Q and C. Entirely obsolete.

I'd not rubber-stamp Kwibek, that's just not how it's ment to sound.


Was Quebec named by the French, who claimed the area, or by the English who later conquered it? Is the proper pronunciation of a place that used by the locals or by those in other countries?

[LarsMac]

Quebec is the French spelling of an American Indian word.

So no surprise that English Speakers are a tad confused about it.

[Wandrin]

LarsMac;1514182 wrote: Quebec is the French spelling of an American Indian word.

So no surprise that English Speakers are a tad confused about it.


There is even the apocryphal French story that Quebec got its name when the French explorers were sailing down the St Lawrence river and one of them pointed and said "Que bec" (translation "what a beak").

[Bruv]

Let us not get into the pronunciation of English place names, or Scottish come to think of it.

My favourite Scottish place name Grandtully and surname Menzies.

There is a long list of English names and places, the best known Worcester, Leicester, Greenwich.

[spot]

Wandrin;1514181 wrote: Was Quebec named by the French, who claimed the area, or by the English who later conquered it?


When Wolfe captured the city of Quebec is was called exactly that, long since, by the French. The British retained the name and the city remained predominantly French.

[magentaflame]

spot;1514173 wrote: They'd be Kebek, Kanada.

Definitely get rid of Q and C. Entirely obsolete.

I'd not rubber-stamp Kwibek, that's just not how it's ment to sound.


Kebek kababs......









Sorry.





:wah:

[LarsMac]

There is a coffee shop in our neighborhood named "Que's"

I have heard a number of pronunciations over the years.

Can you guess the owner's name?

[spot]

Kay.

[magentaflame]

:wah::wah::wah::wah:

I just got that . lol

sorry bit slow this morning....worked Melbourne cup yesterday.