In article <9OVVZCCJM2sCFw1z@jboden.demon.co.uk>, Jeremy Boden <jeremy@jboden.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <0vIse.3598$NU5.1261@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, W. Dale > Hall <mailtodhall@farir.com> writes > >Daryl McCullough wrote: > >> In article <vcbhdfwss49.fsf@beta19.sm.ltu.se>, Torkel Franzen says... > >>>Jeremy Boden <jeremy@jboden.demon.co.uk> writes: > >>> > >>>>I was referring to "British English" as a type 2 oxymoron. > >>> > >>> "British English" is a deliberate coupling of words that are > >>>strictly contradictory? > >> Sort of. "British" refers to the Britons, the people who lived in > >>England prior > >> to the invasion by the Angles and Saxons. The language spoken by the > >>Britons was > >> not English, but Celtic. So "British English" is sort of an oxymoron. > > > >That's amusing. I would nearly have bet money on the proposition > >that Mr. Boden had confused the notion of an oxymoron with that of > >a redundant expression. At least that's what I surmised Torkel > >Franzen's point to have been. > > > In that case I would definitely have nearly taken Mr/Ms Hall's money. > I gave you chapter and verse on the meaning and usage of an oxymoron. > Here it is again:- > Oxymoron - "a contradiction in terms". > > Usual situation: > Unwitting usage - e.g. "Military Intelligence" > > Occasional situation: > Deliberate (ab)usage - e.g. "Strenuously Relaxing" - or indeed "British > English" > > Not a redundant expression in sight. > Can I have my nearly money now please?
You may need your eyesight checked. This ('British English') could be considered a (rather lame) oxymoron when one of the meanings of 'British' is used, but a redundancy when another of its meanings is used.
