never mind
Yeah, there are two broad cases for that:
- Any house that is currently numbered can be named - so if you have a newly built house that is number 15 Strawberry Lane, you can name your house ‘Primrose Cottage’ and submit this to the Royal Mail (I think there’s an online form for it now), and whilst there will probably remain some record in the database to say it’s number 15, you can receive mail addressed to just Primrose Cottage, Strawberry Lane, Town, Postcode. (You could probably just bruteforce this change to the database by telling everyone to write to you at ‘Primrose Cottage, 15 Strawberry Lane’ for a period of time - the post office would probably just pick this up and then you could drop the number).
- Some properties never had a number - they were only ever named, like ‘Lower Something Farm’ or ‘The Vicarage’ or ‘Rose Cottage’ or ‘Something Mill’ - in some cases, these names being established and sufficient for identification before there was a postal system that wanted its own orderly way to find things.
As a matter of fact it was in one of P.G. Wodehouse’s Blandings novels. IIRC the author intentionally stuck to 1920s-era expressions and turns of phrase even when writing decades later.
I got to name a house once (well, provide the Welsh for what my sister-in-law was going to name it). We’ve named ours here, too, but in North America it doesn’t really work.
Our summer cottage in Ontario was like that. A letter addressed to “[Recipient Name] Lakeholme Cottage, Port Bolster,” would reach the correct recipient.
Our summer cottage wasn’t even on a named street. Later, the township would assign us a street name, and a number, but we never used it. “Yeah, across the tracks, take a left at the Taylor place, go halfway down, and look for our name on the right. That’s us.”
On the road naming thing, there are some rules and expectations in the various official UK systems that sometimes cause interesting problems; there is a general (but somewhat flexible) expectation that roads, streets etc will be designated [something] [road/street/avenue/close/way/hill/rise/etc] - that is, the name will be composed of a name-like part and a type-like part. This is already broken by some very ancient names like Bimport and Reforne, as mentioned above, but there is a specific kind of difficulty that arises when the name-like part includes a type-like element.
in 2013, Neil Gaiman wrote a book named ‘The Ocean at the End of the Lane’; some time later, it was decided to name a street in Portsmouth (where he has family connections), in honour of him, and to name it after this book.
This caused some confusion, because the prevailing naming standards either expected this to be:
- A Lane (type), named ‘The Ocean at the End of the’ (name), or
- Something like ‘The Ocean at the End of the Lane Road’ (name, type)
Eventually this was resolved, and the designation only contains a name-like part, which is ’ The Ocean at the End of the Lane
There are a great many examples of the opposite phenomenon, where the designation only contains a type-like part (prefixed by the definite article) - such as ‘The Street’ or ‘The Avenue’
These cause their own interesting problem, in that whilst it is perfectly acceptable and normal for the type-like part of a designation to be abbreviated (Mill Street becomes Mill St; Road becomes Rd; Avenue becomes Ave or Av, etc), it becomes nonsensical when systems automatically abbreviate The Street to ‘The St’.
ETA: I just noticed that Google Maps is abbreviating ‘lane’ to ‘Ln’ for The Ocean at the End of the Lane - which is incorrect.
I once lived on “North Street”, which only caused confusion when abbreviated “N St”.
Well, yeah - it’s obvious if you stop and think about it. The thing is, most people don’t.
I’m fairly sure Google Maps is abbreviating surnames like ‘Lane’ and ‘Street’ on roads that are named in commemoration of people - so if there was a place named Alfred Street Square, after the English Cricketer Alfred Street, Google Maps would label this Alfred St Sq.
I used to live on an unmade road with no house numbers, just names for the dozen or so houses there.
Near me now is Avenue Road which Google correctly calls Avenue Rd instead of Ave Rd.
There’s an interesting term. What is an “unmade” road?
Unmade roads (sometimes ‘unmetalled’ roads) have no permanent hard surface (such as tarmac or concrete). Usually they are just constructed from packed aggregates such as hoggin or hardcore or scalpings
Here’s an example of a typical unmade road (sometimes they are more like just a dirt track - this is a fairly good one)
Unmade roads may often also be unadopted (their maintenance upkeep being the responsibility of the residents or some other organisation that is not the local municipal authority), but metalled roads can also be unadopted.
Interesting. In the US those would generally be referred to according to the material. A gravel road, a dirt road, etc. I can’t think of a common collective term for a road without asphalt. You might refer to them generally as “unpaved,” but that wouldn’t be a common usage.
That’s interesting. In German, there’s even a different way of referring to unpaved roads, we call them “Feldwege” or “Waldwege”, field/forest roads, because they usually lead through fields or forests.
Depends a bit on whether it’s speech or signage - “dirt” or “gravel” is common in speech , but I’ve never seen those on a sign . There, I’ve only seen “unimproved road” .
That’s fair, you’re right, it’s, I guess, a term of art for official descriptions. But I can’t remember anyone casually saying that to describe a road without asphalt.
There is also something called a chip-seal road (UK example) (bitumen + stone chips or some kind of aggregate on top), but that word does not seem to appear in my dictionary. Sometimes they talk about surface dressing.
Unpaved sounds correct to me.
“The unpaved areas of the park were muddy but the roads are fine.”
“This alley was unpaved until the 2000s.”
When I started consuming British media, it took me a while to figure out “shufti”, “dekko”, and “recce”, three words that all mean “take a look, examine”: “Have a shufti at that, mate” (which also uses “have” where Americans would say “take”). “Shufti” I presume is from Hindi or Urdu and “recce” from “reconnoiter”, but I have no clue about “dekko”.
Whereas I had the opposite experience, watching a cricket match between New Zealand and Pakistan while on vacation in the former. (Granted, I had the advantage of having a Barbadian co-worker who’d played high-level amateur cricket explain it to me one night). It’s very closely related to baseball, and if you’re a fan of one, you’ll have no trouble picking up the other. There are obviously some superficial differences – the number of “bases”, the shape of the field, cricket’s version of a home run scores six rather than one – but to my eyes, the only fundamental difference between the two was that in cricket, batting predominates, where in baseball it’s pitching.
Hindi apparently - I think all three of those terms are military/colonial