I asked my work colleague whether her son could read. She said yes, “My son is learning four letter words.”
I responded with “He is learning what?!”
She said he has learnt 3 letter words. Now he is learning four letter words like ‘this’ and ‘that’.
I said I did not want my kids to know four letter words. She did not understand what I was talking about. I explained that four letter words can mean rude / profane utterances.
She thought I was being bizarre. She is from India. She speaks pretty fluent English. But she refuses to accept that there are differences between the way English is in Australia and in India. Even when I point out to her that she using some Hinglish terms like ‘joint family’ meaning extended family and ‘revert’ to mean reply. She still does not accept it.
Anyway, is this term ‘four letter words’ to mean rude / profane utterances commonly understood or not?
Yes, I thought you meant swear words from your thread title.
As an aside, learning to read that way (sounds like Look and Say) is a pretty onerous way to go. Far better to use systematic synthetic phonics with a little bit of Look and Say for the undecodable and high frequency words. Children can then build their vocabulary from reading actual books rather than memorising flash cards.
If your acquaintance is telling people her son is learning four-letter-words at school it will no doubt produce some hilarity (if not an investigation).
Define commonly understood. I had spoken English for well over 15 years before I learned it: like four-letter words themselves, the expression “four-letter words” is not something you learn in ESL. Someone from India is highly likely to have grown with English as a second language or as part of a multi-language soup, and to mix words from other languages as readily as someone from southern California drops in Spanish ones - and as unconciously of doing it; their English is not “Hinglish” (some of those expressions you find strange aren’t borrowed from other languages, they’re archaic but unmixed English), but it’s certainly very different from that of other places.
OP: You’re dealing with a phenomenon I’ve encountered in a few different countries. Many people who are fully aware of the existance of dialects in their own language simpy cannot grasp that English also has dialects.
I am not sure what this has to do with dialect, it is a matter of idiom.
“Four letter words” to mean ‘bad’ words like “fuck”, and the ‘c-word’ that we are not allowed to use even in The Pit, is a widespread, common English idiom. From what others are saying, it is found in U.S. and Australian English, and I can confirm that it is certainly commonly used in British English. I am a bit surprised to hear that an Indian speaker of English would not be familiar with it. English is not a foreign language to Indians, it is one of the two official national languages of the country, and widely spoken.
English may be a “native” language in India, but it’s a living language. Just look at difference between UK and US English. You don’t want to go knocking anyone up in the morning if you’re in the US. Nor would do you want to put a rubber on your pencil.
Sometimes talking with Indian coworkers (or especially when I was in grad school and talking with Indian grad students or postdocs) I want to burst out laughing. The language can be so archaic and so formal compared to even modern British English, much less modern American English. At times it feels like living in a Victorian novel or receiving orders from the Admiralty or something.
And while it is a matter of idiom, not all idioms translate from country to country. How many baseball idioms are present in American English? Some might be fairly common in other countries due to the sheer power of American culture but probably not all of them.
Well, yes, but as pointed out, this idiom is common in both U.S and British English, although the Brits got out of America long before they got out of India. (And with all the people of Indian extraction living in Britain, often with family back in India still, there must still be a lot of linguistic interaction.)
