Welcome to the original English language Poland and Polish discussion group board. This message forum is a place where English-speaking Poles, foreigners (expats) living in Poland, and anyone with a genuine interest in Poland can discuss and read the views of others concerning Poland. Subjects include: Polish news and current affairs; Life in Poland; politics; genealogy research; Polish culture and history; advice and tips on visiting Poland; Polish property and investment issues. The aim of our group is to increase awareness of wonderful Poland using the English language and allow and foster the honest debate and exchange of opinions on anything vaguely related to Poland and Polish - positive, negative and/or neutral! To state the obvious: all opinions and views expressed on this site are solely those of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of anyone else! Messages consisting of ads will be deleted.
Well I didn't mean a thick local dialect nobody can understand, just the hint of an accent combined with a smattering of oft used local phrases not used elsewhere.
Many northerners insist they have no accent when in fact they do.
Doesn't a northern English accent have a negative image in England?
Not to my knowledge. Cockney accents probably have more negative stereotypes in the media.
Yes, Hans, you're right. Even my nondescript Yorkshire accent attracts comments.
Most Brits are town dwellers and most Northern towns are very working-class. So, with Northerners, you have this unhappy mix of class and regional antipathy.
Being a middle-class Northerner confuses everybody! It also leaves you with mixed feelings. You try to have some regional loyalty despite being openly rejected by the the majority in your "home" region.
To rub salt in the wounds, I spent 4 years living in an ex-social housing development (ex-"council estate") in Tonbridge, Kent. It was very working class, but I felt at home for the first time in my life - the Northern working class profoundly hate the middle class and let them know it. Southerners can be much more civilised. When I refer to my "home town", it is like Metternich said "only a geograghical expression".
Oh - I have occasionally used 'funny' words:
laking = playing (you lake footie)
ginnel = a sort of path
bairn = child
thee and thou - in normal use in some places in Yorkshire. I didn't have to explain the concept of "tu" and "vous" in my teaching practice school.
We have regional pronunciations ("hoss" instead of "horse") but dialect is mostly dead.
In that case I guess I've known too many middle class northerners. In my experience they usually have old fashioned values and a work ethic.
That's what I thought.
Our English neighbor/friend recently lent us a 1980s TV series called Boys From The Black Stuff on DVD. Grim places and people.
I haven't seen much of Northern England, except for one week in the Lake District about 20 years ago and a week in the Pennines more recently. No first hand knowledge of large northern cities.
I like the south west, parts of Wales, and Scotland.
I recently had some fun reading a book called Lorna Doone. Great examples of Somerset dialect :)
"Our English neighbor/friend recently lent us a 1980s TV series called Boys From The Black Stuff on DVD. Grim places and people."
I would not base any opinions on 1980s tv shows. This is exactly what americans do. Many northern towns were redeveloped in the 90s and have quite nice city centres now. There are pockets of middle class affluence in most northern towns that far surpass London in their luxury and decadence.
On the other hand you have areas of deprivation that equally surpass London and the south east. There is a very distinct gap between rich and poor.
A think tank recently came up with a plan to close down northern cities like Liverpool, because they were hopeless as going concerns!! A good tourist day out though - enough things of interest to see.
Elephant and Castle (south London) is definitely more depressing!
Something about people from the north of England
Britain's north/south divide: Hand washing?
LONDON (Reuters Life!) - People in the north of Britain are three times as likely to have hands contaminated with fecal bacteria than their compatriots in the south, scientists studying toilet hygiene said on Wednesday.
Researchers swabbed the hands of 409 commuters waiting at bus stops outside railway stations in five cities in Britain and found traces of fecal bugs on more than a quarter of them (28 percent).
Just 13 percent of commuters at London's Euston Station had contaminated hands, compared to 44 percent of those surveyed at Newcastle Central Station, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine study found.
Val Curtis, director of the school's Hygiene Center, said she was surprised by the findings.
"The figures were far higher than we had anticipated, and suggest that there is a real problem with people washing their hands in the UK.
"If any of these people had been suffering from a diarrhea disease, the potential for it to be passed around would be greatly increased by their failure to wash their hands after going to the toilet."
Infectious intestinal diseases are among the biggest killers of children worldwide, while lack of adequate handwashing may be partly responsible for current high levels of hospital-acquired infections, the researchers said.
The study found little geographic variation in the cleanliness of women's hands, with 27 percent overall found dirty
But among the men surveyed there was a clear rise in hand contamination from the south to the north.
Just 6 percent of the men swabbed at Euston were found with fecal bacteria on their hands compared to 53 percent of those at Newcastle Central Station, a nine-fold difference.
In Cardiff the figure was 15 percent, in Birmingham 21 percent and in Liverpool 36 percent.
The researchers said they could see no obvious reason for the regional trend and said further study was needed.
"We therefore propose further investigation of the hypothesis that hands are washed more often or more thoroughly in the south of the UK relative to the north, and that male and female handwashing rates differ geographically."
Yes but was this survey based on swabbing people before or after they had been on public transport? If it was after then it's not so much to do with personal hygiene as with the state of hygiene on the trains and train operator maintenance of cleanliness.
I am very careful to wash my hands after being on the train if I've had to hold the handrail. One of the first things I do when I get into work is wash my hands and same when I get home. I don't know where the hands that have touched the rail have been! One of the easiest ways to avoid spread of disease is to simply wash your hands if you touch anything someone else has touched. I also wash my hands if I've been handling money, a newspaper or in particular petting an animal (particularly dangerous not to wash your hands after that as some animals carry all sorts of nasty diseases in their coats).
I recently went out for the evening in a pub where the gents toilet was closed for refurbishment so ladies and gents had to share the ladies (eek). There was a man in the next cubicle and I was waiting for him to leave the ladies before leaving my cubicle (as I felt he might be a bit embarassed) so was waiting for the hand washing noises but he just finished his business and walked straight out. Glad I wasn't having to shake his hand after that! You don't see women leaving the ladies toilet without washing their hands. So maybe these women with the dirty hands had been holding their boyfriend's or husbands mucky paw.
Have you ever been to Newcastle?
It's a bit rough ... they put a university there to see how many students could get beaten up by the locals.