Forgive me, but that seems rather implausible to me. Do you exclusively read things written by Brits? And did you do so poorly in school that you never even learned the American spellings? Because they do cover spelling in school, and chances are in your high school lit classes you at least read a few books written in the United States.
Sorry, but your explanation doesn’t really hold water. It comes across as extremely affected. Which is fine if that’s how you like to come across - don’t take this as a complaint. But it seems obvious to me that you’re doing it on purpose.
I did very well in school. You do know that there are alternate spellings for things. Or did you do so poorly in school that you never learned that.
That’s your opinion. I know how I grew up. You don’t. I know the things that influenced me while I grew up. You don’t.
No. But I might if I gave a crap about what you think. I suppose I should be pleased that you’ve made two posts in a row just about me. Except I don’t give a crap about that either.
I remember the changes from when I was a kid. I remember waking up and going downstairs to have porridge with my father and listening to the first weather reports with the temperature in Celsius and how strange it seemed. But we got used to it. My generation, though, is sort of bilingual when it comes to measurement. Not so much the younger ones, though.
In Canada, we changed distance signs from miles to kilometres instead of posting miles and kilometres side-by-side. This took some months, and, for a time, the changed signs had little tabs in them that said ‘km’ as a reminder.
For a long time now, distance signs have simply had a number, as before. The ‘km’ is understood. (The tabs must have been removed after the last official distance sign in miles was known to be removed. Even now, though, you still see the occaisional private sign giving a distance in miles, or even yards or feet. I’ve noticed certain small-town McDonalds outlets do this sometimes; it’s rather stupid, because it’s not like the majority of visitors have mile-based odometers any more…)
Now, speed-limit signs were all changed nationwide over one Labour Day weekend sometime around 1977. Highway departments got big reflective number-stickers with the new speed limits to pit over the old numbers, while still keeping the signs. People got little stickers to put on their car’s pre-metric speedometer.
The horrible irony is… the US does not use the Imperial system! It uses the US Customary System of Measurements. The gallon and all its related units are different between US and Imperial: the US gallon is 3.8 litres; the Imperial gallon is 4.5 litres.
There are still a lot of places in Canada where pre-metric measure is used, but I’m not sure whether there is the sense of Imperial measurement as a system any more. They may just be individual units used in specific contexts, like the way furlongs are only used in the context of horse races.
Don’t forget the immense influence of US media, too, with its unceasing flow of material containing miles and gallons. Since we don’t really learn the Imperial system any more, I suspect that the US system has taken over in non-metric contexts in Canada. I’ll have to ask the next person I meet who uses a gallon.
I wish Canada would finish converting to metric. Trying to buy A4 paper in Toronto is a real pain.
Australia went metric in the early 1970s. I was in primary school at the time and I still remember when we were all issued with our new 30cm rulers to replace the 12 inch ones. There was a transition period when road signs were marked in kms/miles, temperatures were given in C/F etc, but gradually we all got used to it and I think the official government metrication Board was abolished in the early 1980s some time.
One could argue that if time was decimalized it would make more sense and be nice and round.
Who needs 60 seconds to a minute, 60 minutes to an hour and 24 hours in a day? We should speed up the rate of a second: have 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour and 10 hours in a day. That’s simple and round - but hair-brained (to everyone but clock manufacturers) nonetheless.
Most of what remains of Imperial measures in Canada is due to the US. The North American market for paper is treated as a single entity, and whatever the prevailing sizes in the US are, that’s what we get too. One of the big areas is the construction industry, which frankly is a giant hodgepodge of mixed measurements. The plans for your addition that you file to get your building permit have to be in metric, but since all the lumber stock is measured in feet and inches, the addition will be framed with 2x6s on 16" centres and sheeted with 4’x8’ sheets of OSB, etc. Commercial construction is even worse. Some things are measured in metric, others in imperial. It’s horrible. But the sizes of things aren’t going to change until the US switches - there’s no way a lumber mill is going to increase costs by producing two entire lines of product, one in each measurement system - so we’re pretty much stuck with it.
Funny thing: The pediatrician writes down on a little slip of paper our baby’s measurements each checkup: Weight in pounds and ouces, length in inches, and head circumference in centimeters.
Makes perfect sense. And if you don’t like it, I’ll say what Emerson once said (paraphrasing), “Consistency is the hobgoblin of a fucking jackass.”
I just don’t get the need to purge the nation of all non-metric units. Ooh, things would be more consistent–who cares? Japan continues to mix and match traditional and metric units, so does China, so do a lot of places.
I think there’s probably a generation divide. I have no problem understanding body weight in either stones or kilos, and are probably equally-likely to give mine in either unit (however, the American habit of giving an answer in pounds involves dividing by 14 to understand it)
I’d consider myself that younger generation. Even though we were taught just metric in school, one is forced to learn imperial in the work place, as Gorsnak illistrates. It was annoying and confusing, but one adapts. As a result I can now estimate distance in either metric or imperial.
What been most difficult for me to learn has been reading a imperial measuring tape. I can get the inches alright, but it’s the fraction. My father can get it at a glance while I need to count out the little lines to get my measurement. Reading the same length using metric would be so much easier, but then I’d have to convert it over for the measurment to be useful.
Although we’re taught metric it’s impossible to get by without learning both. My guess is that living next to the States and still having those who were taught imperial in school has kept it alive up here.
Temperature throws me for a loop. Farenhiet is just so awkward. I only know 100 is exceedingly hot. The rest I’m clueless about.
I sometimes buy British beer in cans in the US. Of two in my fridge at the moment, one says “1 pint” and the the other says “1 pint .9 fl oz”, though they appear to be the same size. Neither has its volume in metric, wich is unfortunate, since the units are ambiguous for a produt made in one measurement regime and sold in another.
My guess is that “1 pint” is an imperial pint, of about 570 ml, and that “1 pint .9 fl oz” is American units, of about 475 ml plus 27 ml, to give about 500 ml – so that the apparently larger can may in fact be smaller. But I could be wrong, which is the really stupid thing about these measurements.
Most cans in Britain are 440ml or 500ml, and bottles mostly 330ml or 500ml - while the pint remains the only way to sell draught beer (indeed the only legal unit of measurement for selling it), imperial pint cans and bottles are rare. I suspect that your ‘one pint’ can is actually 16fl.oz / 475ml.
Xploder and Excalibre, if y’all feel the need to so strongly question Johnny L.A. about his personal tastes, do it in a new thread. Not here. Thank you.
Australia and NZ went metric in '67/'68 (years before I was even a twinkle in my Dad’s eye, so to speak), but I’ve found that in NZ the two systems exist in a strange hybrid- for example, all speeds and distances are in KMs, but very short measurements are likely to be in inches, with a lot of people interchanging Yard and Metre (something I do as well). In Australia, it seems a lot more clear cut- either you’re Imperial, in which case it’s Miles/Feet/Inches/Gallons etc, or you’re Metric, in which case you’ve got no idea what your parents are on about when they say they want a pint of milk from the shops.
I understand the Imperial System well enough to measure things in feet, inches, and miles, but I just can’t get the hang of the Imperial weights and measures- an ounce means nothing to me, for example, and the only reason I know what a Pint looks like was because I spent too much time in the pubs in England when I was first there.
Interestingly, almost all the old rifle sights are in Imperial measurements (For example, the sights on an SMLE Mk III rifle are graduated to 2000yds), whereas the sights on a Mauser K98 are in Metric (Germany having gone Metric in the 19th Century whilst the British were busy selling Opium to the Chinese and colonising Africa, which may have explained a few things later on…)
Of course, if you want to get REALLY Olde Schoole, then we can start talking Grains (used for measuring gunpowder and bullet weights, and something that I understand within its own context but not relating to any other measurements), Arshins (a Russian measurement, found on M91 Moisin-Nagant Rifles), and my personal favourite, “About yea long”, holding your hands at whatever distance you’re trying to indicate.
I’m all for the metric system-but make EVERYTHING metric, and DON’T keep certain things in the old system. For example-my car (SATURN). I went to change the oil and guess what-the oil plug is metric (15 mm)-the rest of the bolts in the car are english-why?? People would make the transition easier if we did it overnight-in 3 montsh nobody would be confused anymore. The odd thing-in the semiconductor industry, metric and english coexist-wafer thickness are quote in “mils” (thousandths of inches0, while feature dimensions are in micron s (millionths of meters). Again-why?
