Yes they are. Fish and chips is a fine bar food. Also a terrific lunch when purchased from my favorite secret location featuring the world’s best fish and chips, a former school bus converted to a fish-and-chips stand near the docks of a small town on the shore of Georgian Bay, whose location I refuse to divulge. Whereas “fish and fries” does not exist as a culinary concept, and sounds like it would be some horror served up at McDonald’s as “the McFish Meal”. Brits win. US isn’t even in the race.
It is not. Unless you live in a world where “47” is “forty and seven”. Or 1,347 is one thousand and three hundred and forty and seven. Nor is it a list, in the manner of “four calling birds, three French hens, two turtle doves, and a partridge in a pear tree.”
I’m also more slightly likely to hear “spring forward” than “spring back” since it’s sometimes used in the sense of lurching toward something. But I agree that “spring forward” is the weaker link in the mnemonic.
Ok, I didn’t really follow what you meant then. Are you saying that in the U.S., casual or work pants are always just pants, but formal pants can be called trousers? I didn’t know that.
Good point! The whole chips vs fries debate may come down to something like this:
US: Potato chips, tortilla chips, pita chips, etc. = UK: crisps(?) [exception: US: Fish-n-chips, which are fresh, fried potatoes]
UK: Chips = US: Fries (various forms)?
I still go with a US win, since potatoes thinly sliced, dunked in hot oil until crispy, seasoned and then bagged for later consumption seems more like “chips” of a potato, whereas potatoes cut into thin/thick strips, fried in hot oil until crisp on the outside and soft on the inside then seasoned and served hot for immediate consumption seem more like “fries”, or French pomme-frites (with the exception of the aforementioned Fish-n-Chips.
In the US, formal trousers are typically known as “slacks”, which are, I think, often distinguished by the more vertical cut of the front pockets.
Then, of course, there is the muddle of “knickerbockers”. In the US, these were knee-length pants, similar to the legwear of modern baseball and grid football players and Ian Anderson. Their similarity to a woman’s long, loose undergarment has led to the British usage “knickers” to exclusively mean all types of women’s underwear. Ultimately, New York’s basketball team has come to be known as the Knicks, to avoid confusion.
US wins.
The word Diaper is specific, unambiguous.
Nappies could be any number of napkin-type products.
Which,of course, leads us to the next vital issue:
US: napkins
Brit: serviettes
Again,the US wins. Serviettes is too stilted and posh-sounding for a cheap piece of paper that gets tossed into the trash.
Which leads us to:
US: “Trash it”.
Brit: “Bin it”
This time, the Brits win.
To trash something implies wanton destruction.
To “bin it” is more genteel. And also sounds nicer than the way a Yankee might sneer “toss it out” .
That’s because a budgie is a parakeet, but a parakeet is not necessarily a budgie. There are many species of parakeets. The one most commonly kept as a pet is a budgie (or more accurately budgerigar). The next most common is the monk parakeet which is sometimes called a Quaker Parrot. There are a few others commonly kept as pets, but budgies are by far the most common one.