Talk:New Zealand English

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nquindem, Melodynanfito. Peer reviewers: Jason Hall UA.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Vocabulary section is very poor

The section contains a large number of unreferenced and/or incorrect claims regarding vocabulary, e.g. that 'ice block' has been borrowed from American English, or that 'dunny' originated in New Zealand.

Frankly, the section is a mess and needs a serious clean-up. I'd suggest a list of common differences from both British and American English, as is found in the article on Australian English as a way of neatly summarising lexical differences. A list summarising direct borrowings from American and Australian English, in the same format, may also be useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.29.86 (talk) 22:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm no lexicographer, but I am American and "bushwhack" does not mean "fell timber" in American English. It means to travel across land not using a (man made) path (i.e 'cross-country). Also "crib" is in common use in the USA. I believe (but do not know) it's mostly for urban apartments or homes/residences. (It also appears in my 1993 sOED, so not exclusive to the USA). It should, imho, be removed as a New Zealandism.72.16.97.19 (talk) 12:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Much of the vocabulary section should be removed, it has been a good excuse for novice editors to play around with edits. Bushwack? I've never heard it used in NZ. Crib, does mean a country holOnly day cottage - used in the south - as opposed to the word bach which means the same in the rest of NZ. I also question if vocabulary should be used to describe a language variant. Grammar and sound should be I think. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:18, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Vocabulary is one of the main distinguishing factors of English variants as it a major factor of jokes and stereotypes, such as Canadians saying "eh", Brits saying "innit", Australians saying "g'day", etc. With this in mind, I think a vocabulary section is quite important, however I do agree that it needs some work. ―Panamitsu (talk) 00:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I have removed bushwhack - 'fell timber' as an American use is supported by NZ Oxford Dictionary, but not by OED, nor New Oxford American Dictionary, both of which can be expected to be more reliable on US use than the NZ dictionary. Nurg (talk) 02:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Removal of ‘prawn’ from ‘Differences from Australian English’

Prawn is a term for edible shrimp in Australia and New Zealand. Smaller ones are also called shrimp in Australia and prawns as in prawn cocktail or prawn skewer are called prawns in New Zealand too. Written by an Aussie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.229.148.166 (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Prawns and shrimp are different animals. Just saying. 58.80.201.106 (talk) 23:07, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Colloquialisms expansion

Useful starting thread for expanding on Kiwi slang: [1]  Nixinova   T   C   21:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC) [2] 01:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I would be happy to get broad agreement that we limit the kiwiana section to one paragraph and a list of no more than ten words. That would go a long way to removing this endlessly pointless playing around with expressions, edit wars and other tinkering edits. None of it is in the least bit productive or encyclopedic. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Cleaning up New Zealandisms

The entire sections needs a clean up with a lot of the section needs citing, however this will focus on particular words. For reference the section New Zealandisms specifies that New Zealand has it's own unique words and phrases derived entirely in New Zealand.

Removal

• and that (phrase) - Should be removed because even within it's own example it states that it's used in the UK
• Barbie (noun) - Should be removed because even within it's own example it states that it's borrowed from Australia
• G'Day (greeting) - Should be removed because even within it's own example it states that it's borrowed from Australia
• Dag - the wikipedia page on dag can summarize this better, but it originated in usage from the UK, and the current usage is shared between Australia and New Zealand.
• Heaps - Used in multiple other dialects of English including British English. Kaplan International Languages lists it as Australian english in the same usage, and the usage relates to the british usage to mean a lot of something as noted in the Oxford Learners dictionary and Cambridge Dictionary.
• jug (noun) - used in Australian English as electric jugs were originally made in both Australia and New Zealand both language dialects use the term jug to mean electric kettles today because of this as shown in Australian usage in this Sydney Morning Herald article.
• slab (noun) - used in Australian English, notable is that this is mentioned in the Beer in Australia page, also uncited. Macquarie dictionary has a page defining it as such. Of note is that I can't find reference to a slab of beer in the New Zealand context, though this was only a cursory search. However, what may pause this is that the unsourced addition mentions a 12 pack is also referred to as a slab, though I can not find any example of this being used in New Zealand or Australia.
• togs (noun) - used in Australian English, the BBC has an article exploring the origin, indicating that it's use for swim wear is of shared origin rather than derived in New Zealand.

I'm proposing to remove these entries, however an alternate solution could be to change the section from New Zealandisms to a broader section on words and phrases used in New Zealand, though such a section would likely become exceedingly large. In either case the remaining entries will also need sourcing as it seems improper to have a section that is in large part unsourced, especially as anyone could add very small regional or generational slang with little challenge. Gladfire (talk) 06:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I would suggest you don't remove things wholesale. The article could do with cleaning up and would benefit from additional citations. However, rather than removing things that are not uniquely New Zealand English, it may well be better to move to the sections concerning external influence eg move "Barbie (noun)" to the section on Australian English. WCM_email 07:42, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Might be a good idea, though that section is arguably even worse than New Zealandisms in regards to it's quality and layout. Additionally for some of these words like jug for an electric kettle, it's not clear whether usage started in Australia or New Zealand so being under Australian English Influences might be inappropriate. It could be worth removing the Australian English Influences entirely and replacing it with something similar to the Difference from Australian English table that's labeled something along the lines of Terms Shared with Australian English, though that may be worth it's own talk page section? Gladfire (talk) 08:27, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

It does need some better sourcing, do you have sources in mind to use as the basis of a clean up? It would be better to derive a suggestion for a layout based on how this is treated in academic sources. WCM_email 08:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm not even sure where to look because a lot of this is slang and/or brand names so reliable linguistic sources are unlikely to have them, leaving a jumble of sources that may not be appropriate. Even the Macquarie Dictionary source I listed, I realized after the fact, may actually be a page that registered users can add to, so it's not exactly a valid source to put on the page, though does show usage for the purpose of a talk page. This is part of the reason I proposed removal of the entries that I did, as I could point out were entirely or partially false rather than all unsourced entries. Gladfire (talk) 09:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I definitely don't think that those entries should be removed - many of them are still kiwi slang or have significance in NZ, even if they're not exclusively kiwi. This is especially true for many of the ones that are borrowed from Australian English - if we don't have it in the NZ English article because it's used in Australian English, and we don't have it in the Australian English article because it's used in NZ English, then where would you propose those words be covered? We don't have an article on Antipodean English. Turnagra (talk) 09:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I tend to agree. You are assuming, Gladfire, that a New Zealandism must have originated in NZ, which I do not think is correct. I have steered clear of this article for a long time because it is one of those articles that is difficult to create and to edit succinctly with proper sources. Consequently we get a somewhat disorganised collection of words and phrases that more closely reflects people's personal views than what sourses say. I think the whole article could do with a clean-up. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

It's not really an assumption, it's following what is stated in the establishing sentence of the section. "In addition to word and phrase borrowings from Australian, British and American English, New Zealand has its own unique words and phrases derived entirely in New Zealand, many of which are slang terms". It separates out words and phrases that are borrowed from other dialects. Having it not be this would also kind of invalidate the two previous sections or lead to re-stated information. At this stage after the comment chain with Wee Curry Monster, I'm leaning towards removing the UK derived one entirely, moving the Australian derived or shared entries to Australian influences as a preliminary action, before opening a separate talk section on potentially reworking the entire vocabulary section. Gladfire (talk) 10:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm entirely open to the restructuring suggested but it need to be done systematically and guided by reliable sources. Linguists do consider slang phrases in studying language so this should be possible to source. In British English, I'd look to experts such as Susie Dent (she is a TV personality and well known linguist) but not so certain on who I could cite as an expert on NZ English. I did a google search, which turned up a couple of sources that might be suitable [3]. These are available readily on Amazon eg [4] and appears to be available in libraries [5]. WCM_email 12:10, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I also tend to agree with what Roger 8 Roger and Turnagra have stated here: I don't agree that a New Zealandism has to originate in New Zealand. It might be worth expanding the scope of the article to New Zealand slang or something similar. --Spekkios (talk) 02:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Gladfire I feel like a section on New Zealandisms needs to include "yeah nah" as I would argue that this is one of the most definitive phrases used in only in New Zealand, perhaps only second to the subconscious use of 'eh' at the end of a sentence. 47.72.83.124 (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Hate to tell you this, but "yeah nah" is well known and well used in Australia. HiLo48 (talk) 23:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Chur, bro. Should definitely be added. Schwede66 23:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Kūmara and macrons

@Roger 8 Roger: here are 35 different sources in NZ English which use Kūmara with a macron. Please stop your vexatious and disruptive editing over macrons, and accept that NZ English uses them.

[6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40]

Turnagra (talk) 09:45, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

John Macalister's NZ English corpus (haven't looked yet, as it uses WordSmith which is a Windows app and I don't have time to figure out Wine now) and |https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/lals/resources/corpora-default other NZ English corpora] like the WWC would be good resources to look at. Maybe the New Zealand English Journal, its Māori in English bibliography, or the Dominion Post / Stuff language articles may all be good sources too. More when I have time. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 11:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

A very quick look shows [41][42]. Both illustrate that words with macrons are foreign (non-English) words. Which has always been my point. If they are used in English they are used as foreign words, not words of foreign origin that have been assimilated into English. For many of these words we do not need to use the foreign language version of the word because English already has its own version. The sweet potato word in English is kumara. The Maori word is Kūmara. The argument is whether NZ English has stepped backwards in time and "un-assimilated" the word kumara and started now to use the foreign word Kūmara. (Backwards because the usual and natural path over time is for foreign words to become assimilated into another language). Sources should give us the evidence we need to determine which version of a word is used, the English or the Maori, but we have the problem of many of our sources being influenced by govt non-independent control. That is particularly true of placenames, but also affects other words, like kumara. Ping - Turnagra..... Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Your stance is still inconsistent with practice on this entry. You still offered no evidence, for instance, supporting differing levels of integration of kūmara and whānau. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 01:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

ugh, not this again. For the umpteenth time, New Zealand English uses macrons. They are on words of Māori origin, yes, but they are still used in English. Macrons and other grammatical tendencies from Māori (eg. not using an -s for plural) are not a sign that the words have not been fully adopted, but rather that people are paying more respect to te reo Māori.

You're clearly entrenched in your belief that this is all a grand government conspiracy, so I'm not inclined to continue this conversation any further. Turnagra (talk) 10:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Illogicality

Turnagra, I will try to keep this simple. If the spelling of kumara in English has a macron then reference it with an English language source, such as an English language dictionary, not a maori language dictionary. I have questioned the source used, not the spelling itself. The correct source I replaced it with, an English language dictionary, spells kumara without a macron. It does not even say that the maori word, with a macron, is often used in NZE as a foreign word. If you want the macron put back you need to find a proper source. In fact, now that I have provided a source that shows no macron is used you need to provide more than one source that says a macron is used, to establish weight. And no, we have not establish that NZE uses macrons. The issue has been fudged, disputed (not just by me) and analyzed incorrectly for a long time. Your illogical reversal here is simply more proof that you are analyzing the issue incorrectly - incorrect analysis leads to illogical conclusions. But pls consider this is about the source not the spelling. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:49, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

See the 35 references I posted above. Turnagra (talk) 09:49, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Quick follow on reply - your post above crossed with mine, and you seem to have provided the weighting I mentioned although I have yet to view your 35 sources. A note of admiration by me that you can drum up 35 refs in such a short time. Now, I will look at them. And please, refrain from using such words as vexatious - it does your case no favours. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I can see those sources of yours. I suggest you use a couple of those sources to reference the macron spelling, not a maori language dictionary. Remember, I have said all along this is about the source, not the spelling. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:01, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm baffled. "Kūmara is a Māori word. Using it in English text won't change that. So why are you objecting to using a Māori dictionary as a reference for its spelling when you also say that's fine for Māori words? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 11:09, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Words can be part of multiple languages. Kumara has become part of New Zealand English. --Spekkios (talk) 07:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The word is a borrowed word from Maori. It is no different from countless other words such as cafe, trait, chow, chalet, kindergarten. The issue is the level of integration into English that has occurred. That level of integration will determine its spelling and the more specific name we call it ('borrowed word' covers a wide range). With a low level of integration the term foreign word is often used because there is little adaptation of the word to fit better into English, such as keeping awkward spellings (for English speakers) or diacritics (which with are not a standard part of English). With a high degree of integration a borrowed word will be described by terms such as 'an English word of foreign origin', eg 'spectrum'. Integration of a borrowed word usually happens over time, sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. The word kumara was borrowed many decades ago and has undergone a high level of integration, in my view to a level where it is better described as an English word of Maori/foreign origin than as a foreign word. Therefore, to add a macron now, and to call it a Maori word, is going backwards from the normal integration path a borrowed word takes. You insist the word kumara is a Maori word: I say it is an English word of Maori origin. Taking your view, we should add a macron: taking my view then no, a macron should not be used. There is no easy right or wrong here, it comes down to interpretation and opinion. Ponder that when you next sit sipping lager in the beer garden, oops, I mean biergarden, or is it biergarten, or maybe biergärten? A complication in NZ is that the Maori words are easily pronounced and spelt by English speakers so there has not been much spelling adaptation, which gives an impression that the word is still a foreign word, sometimes spelt slightly wrong, eg lacking a macron. A bigger complication is the political agenda being followed that is driving much of this debate and is giving the wrong impression that the recent spelling reversals are a natural progression. If we are going to use macrons in wikipedia it should be a decision reached based on the above, not on whether the correct spelling is kumara or Kūmara - both spellings are correct in different contexts. We first need to establish the context. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:10, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Frankly, it seems a bit naïve to say that English doesn't use diacritics. It's a point that's been whacked around like a papier-mâché piñata so much that I'm starting to think that your claim to be open to changing on this issue is just a façade. I do tire of having to constantly go on about this, I'd far rather sit down in a café for an éclair and a frappé, or maybe a nice rosé. Some sautéd Jalapeño poppers are always a good choice too, especially if it's à la carte. My willingness to engage is only made worse by the föhn wind and La Niña which we've got at the moment.

I'm being facetious of course, but in all seriousness I do tire of this argument. The only source to date which you've provided to back up your claims about macron usage in NZ English has been an overtly conspiratorial magazine, and you seem to be the only one with this issue. At a certain point you need to let it go. Turnagra (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Good one! Made me smile. The only thing I can add is that "biergärten" is wrong, as it's the plural of "biergarten". Schwede66 22:10, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, these words are used in English, but the people using the diacritics IN ENGLISH will absolutely be in the minority, so your point is moot. 58.80.201.106 (talk) 23:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

That level of integration will determine its spelling Time to present your hard evidence about the differing levels of integration of kūmara and whānau (which is present in that form in the exact same section), or let the kūmara spelling be. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 02:16, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Turnagra, nothing in your post contradicts what I said. All you have done is throw in a host of borrowed words and used them in their mildly integrated form, ie keeping their diacritics. They could all just as easily, and more commonly, be written in their more assimilated form, ie without diacritics. Naive is different - the umlaut is a pronunciation aid to what otherwise would be a confusing combination of vowels - no different from writing re-enter instead of reenter. If you want to counter my argument then counter what I don't say, but that might not gather S many sniggers. I never said biergärten was singular: it was there to illustrate the use of a diacritic - the singular without the umlaut had already been written. Back to the original point, kumara is an English word because it is used in English, that is why it is in an English dictionary. The word Vater is not an English word because it is not used in Englsh, so it is not in an English dictionary. Simple really? So, to reference its spelling use an English dictionary. If it isn't in an English dictionary it isn't an English word, so it should not be used in written English without there being a good reason for doing so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roger 8 Roger (talk • contribs) 01:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

I have been asked to provide evidence of my view about the artificiality of much of the claim here that NZ English uses Maori words regularly and always has, at the level of a 'foreign word' (which has a definition in linguistics). Being a 'foreign word' would mean the word can rightly continue to use much of its form from the donor language, such as using macrons. Well, here is one reference.[43] It is not ideal but it is academic and it is about NZ which makes it useful. The source says: Because Māori words themselves are being used to signal cultural, social and political identities in a deliberate manner, linguistic markers of entrenchment are not relevant predictors here. Once again I say...we should not be using certain words to make an agenda based point: much of what we see and hear out there in society today is being done in a "deliberate manner", to follow an agenda. Once you, Turnagra and a few others, accept that this is what is happening, we can then have a more meaningful debate about how WP should deal with it. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

I guess "a few others" includes me. Having just read both that link and https://nzlingsoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/LangSoc-2018-complete-abstract-booklet-final.pdf linked from it (the relevant part is page 40):

• neither mentions macrons.
• I don't buy "it's academic" about the former: not only is it a blog post with "opinion" in the URL, the tone and language both show it's not a research article.
• the only mention of macrons in loanwords in that conference booklet (page 55, "Variable use of diacritics to mark loanwords in New Zealand English") comes with a honking qualifier: "usage since 1987 may be expected to show some shift away from this baseline".

So I don't think this is evidence of anything relevant to this discussion, personally. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Have you been able to find better evidence supporting your position in the past month? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 00:56, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Whom are you addressing, Crab? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 12:15, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

That would be you (see the position of my reply and the : at the start of it :I guess "a few others" includes me.). It's unclear to me why you needed to ask. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 01:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Because it was unclear, obviously. I was also confused who you were referring to. Maybe you could just state it next time. 58.80.201.106 (talk) 23:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Sidewalk

Does anyone understand the origins and useage of the terms footpath, pavement and sidewalk enough to add them to the vocabulary list? Johnragla (talk) 22:18, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure which one is the New Zealandism - I've heard footpath and pavement used interchangeably, although I'm pretty sure sidewalk is US English.

Etymonline says foot-path (n.) also footpath, "narrow path or way for foot travelers only, 1520"; and pavement: From c. 1300 as "a paved roadway," gradually passing in modern times to the sense of "a sidewalk, paved footway on each side of a street.". Sidewalk mentions the US/UK difference: sidewalk (n.) "path for pedestrians on the side of a street," 1721, from side (adj.) + walk (n.). The use of sidewalk for pavement as one of the characteristic differences between American and British English has been noted at least since 1902. https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=sidewalk

From that info I could guess that it's footpath (NZ), pavement (UK), and sidewalk (US/CA). No idea which is AU. History would be that footpath used to be used in UK English but is now obscure. I'd need to do a lot more research to be sure. TreeReader (talk) 13:02, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Why not consider that none is a 'New Zealandism'? New Zealanders have not chosen which one to use so they use them all interchangeably. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I work as a transport engineer and the profession only ever uses footpath. You only hear other terms from recent immigrant engineer and they soon learn that it's a footpath downunder. Schwede66 00:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

An Australian here. Watching Highway Cops the other night, I'll swear one of the police called it a sidewalk. HiLo48 (talk) 01:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

'Footpath' is the usual word in NZ, as Schwede says, but it is also used in some other countries, so we would not add it to the list of "unique words and phrases derived entirely in New Zealand". Nurg (talk) 02:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the term 'New Zealandism' is being stretched to include words that are also used elsewhere. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

"Footpath" is the NZ English word. "Pavement" I only hear used to mean the surface of a sealed footpath or road. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:47, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! Turns out I should've checked wikipedia itself - there's a page on Sidewalk which states (with dictionary references) that sidewalk is US, pavement UK and footpath AU/NZ! I've also asked a UK friend and they're sure it's pavement. Obviously not very thorough research, but good enough for now. Anyway, as you say Nurg it doesn't seem to be a unique word and phrase derived entirely in NZ - just part of our Southern Hemisphere lexicon.

With that in mind, I think I'll leave it off the list for now until someone creates a list of NZ lexicon prevalent but not unique to NZ. Can always link to sidewalk if we need. TreeReader (talk) 16:25, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

NZ Official Languages

Wikipedia claims that New Zealand has three official languages, English, Māori and sign language.  English is not an official language in New Zealand. The official languages are Māori and sign language. 203.211.77.128 (talk) 08:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Does it? While both the Māori language and New Zealand Sign Language have official status, as detailed in legislation, this is mostly limited to the right to use these languages in legal proceedings and other limited circumstances. English has no equivalent legal protection, but its widespread use is commonly accepted and generally assumed by common law. Schwede66 09:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) See Talk:Languages of New Zealand#English as an Official/National Language.-gadfium 09:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Legal status of English

Hi Turnagra. I expected a reversal. My reply - Copy of aricle below...

"While both the Māori language and New Zealand Sign Language have official status, as detailed in legislation, this is mostly limited to the right to use these languages in legal proceedings and other limited circumstances. English has no equivalent legal protection, but its widespread use is commonly accepted and generally assumed by common law, though requiring a completely "English only" workplace without a justifiable reason could be seen as discriminatory. In February 2018, Clayton Mitchell MP from New Zealand First led a campaign for English to be legally recognised as an official language in New Zealand. Justice Minister Amy Adams said "English is a de facto official language by virtue of its widespread use," while Professor Andrew Geddis called Mitchell's bill "legal nonsense" "

1/ Sentence 1 – So what? This article and section is about the legal status of English. The sentence is off topic and drawing attention to Maori and NZSL.

2/ Sentence 2- Doesn’t make sense. I think it is trying to say English is regarded as official by its widespread unopposed use, which is what my deletion left in place. The second part is a blatant fork to an unrelated topic with a clear intent to minimise the status of English in NZ.

3/ Sentence 3 – Possibly keep but should be put in context.

4/ Sentence 4 – Pointless repletion of what was said earlier.

5/ Sentence 5 – Yes, I agree it is legal nonsense…because its not necessary. However, whatever Prof Geddes meant must be put in better context otherwise it reads, yet again, as a put down of the status of English in NZ.

In summary, this entire section should be re-written. What I think can be kept is what I did keep. Please remember, this section is about the legal status of English which is unrestricted in any situation and is spoken and understood by the vast majority of people. Those who cannot speak or understand it are a few foreign immigrants, not Moari. So, please stop trying to draw a comparison with te reo, as if they are somehow equal. They are equal as being languages but they are not anywhere near equal in their use in NZ. The preservation of te reo is a laudable aim and there are ways to do it, but not at the expense of English. I’m surprised that you don’t seem to see how so many articles are being adversely affected by this Moari promotion, as in the section in question here. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

This article is also about New Zealand English, as in, a specific form of English. This paragraph on the other hand is about the legal status two other languages which are not New Zealand English. I think it's simply off topic in the first place and would better belong in the article Languages of New Zealand. ―Panamitsu (talk) 11:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Firstly, apologies - for some reason I had assumed that this was the Languages of New Zealand page. I agree that the section could do with a rework in the context - but I think that your change isn't it, particularly as you don't speak to the legal status at all. Secondly, if you had expected a revert, then maybe start with the talk page rather than making the change outright?

As for the paragraph itself, I don't think an accurate description of English's legal status in New Zealand is trying to minimise the status of English in NZ. On the other hand, simply stating that "English is accepted as an official language because it's used lots" doesn't tell readers anything about the legal status of it in NZ. I also think that, while we probably don't need as much as there is currently, it's absolutely worth drawing comparisons between English and our other two official languages. This is not Māori promotion by any means, but trying to ensure that the article is accurate and useful to readers (but on that note, Māori only has five letters. Learn to spell it properly). Turnagra (talk) 06:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

I might be wrong but I don't think there has ever been anything in law to describe the position of English in NZ. It just is what it is. It is understood by almost everybody so there is no need to do anything. The rare occasions when somebody cannot use it translators are supplied, like a Chinese guy recently taken to court. I cannot think of a word to describe that status of English. Official de facto is probably the closest but that isn't ideal because it is quite different from a language that is official de jure but the word official in both means people treat them as sort of the same. Calling it the national language would also be wrong because it's too ambiguous. My preference is to separate the English from Maori and NZSL and don't compare them, but that would require not using the word official to describe English. I have tried using the word primary language but that didn't catch on. That is why in this subsection I think it is confusing and misleading and not really possible to try to compare English with Maori and NZSL. If someone made a point of wanting to be spoken to in English it would be because that is the language everyone uses to be understood, not because it is official. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 07:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

That's exactly the point of the paragraph, though. It's saying that, even though English is treated as an official language alongside Māori and NZSL, it has no legal recognition, and that there have been moves to try and address this. As for the rest of the paragraph, Wikipedia is not about defining your own terms or driving how English is described, it's about reflecting how reliable sources describe it. Turnagra (talk) 08:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

I think that all correspondents so far (and now including me) agree that we "don't need as much as there is currently". And I think we can probably agree that at least some of the info is better covered in Languages of New Zealand#Official languages, rather than here. So I suggest that if anyone wants to move (and rework) content from here to there, go ahead. Nurg (talk) 10:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Claimed rule not supported by reference

For the following quote:

"Since the advent of word processors with spell-checkers, in modern assignment writing in New Zealand universities the rule is to use either 100% British spelling or 100% American spelling, the emphasis being consistency."

The linked article states that most lecturers at Massey expect British English, while some lecturers only require that the stated rule is followed. GrapesRock (talk) 06:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I think the sentence could be remove altogether as it is not about New Zealand English. It is a thing done all throughout the world (including Wikipedia), so I think it'd be more useful on an article about English varities in general, such as American and British English spelling differences. ―Panamitsu (talk) 09:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I think what could make it unique is that the citation says that most expect British English, but some just want 100% British OR 100% American (i.e. the majority preference for British English could be relevant to NZ English). I don't have a strong opinion whether this guideline from Massey is relevant enough to NZ English in general.

More generally, it looks like nearly all of the section seems to follow that pattern of preferring British English (with a few exceptions such as fiord or tonne), which leads me to wonder whether the section could be cut down significantly, by noting the general rule, and then naming the exceptions? GrapesRock (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Cockney?!?

The Infobox shows NZE as a branch of Cockney English. BUT, there's no other reference to Cockney English in the article, and no reference to NZE in the Cockney English article. Seems more likely that NZE descended from various English dialects given the 19th century immigration history. 114.23.162.174 (talk) 08:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The link is silly so best to remove it. Also, please don't use the word dialect when you mean accent. A dialect is further removed from the subject language. It is a word that is abused here and in many other articles about English variants. NZE is closer to mainstream UK English than many regional variants in the British Isles. A vowel sound difference and the occasional greater use of certain words does not make a regional variant a dialect. Part of the problem is people's natural longing to be somehow different and unique: New Zealanders are especially prone to that. Another problem is the artificial use of numerous Maori words instead of the normal English word by officially controlled bodies that gives the impression to the outsider or naive local that such vocabulary is part of a uniquely different dialect called New Zealand English. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

But those Maori words often do become part of the commonly used language. You may never use them, but others do. HiLo48 (talk) 23:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Maori words have been part of English for 200 years and have been used mainly, but not exclusively, in New Zealand. They are no different from other words more commonly used in certain regions (aye, rather than yes, in commonly used in Scotland and the north of England, for example, but the word does not belong exclusively to those regions) Some other New Zealanders do use some of the very recently used Maori words, but they are either a distinct minority and/or part of an academic or youth elite for whom use of them is seen as somehow right and proper. That is no different from what happens with other languages which a small group tries to promote, protect or revive - see Moriori and Cornish and Irish, for example. Those languages are given a prominance far greater than their actual use in a community. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 00:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

You lost me when you misused the word "elite" HiLo48 (talk) 00:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Bungee vs. Bungy

Today, I realized that New Zealand English generally uses the term 'bungy' instead of 'bungee'. I think most New Zealanders would know bungee jumping was comercialized in New Zealand. 'Bungy' appears to be a regional spelling of the word 'bungee' (see what NZ Herald and Stuff use). American (and international) sources use the common spelling. (see [44][45][46]). Would someone want to add this info to the article?? Alexeyevitch^(talk) 09:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Found this [47] Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thx but that is a self-published source (from 2002) so it's unreliable. I'm certain the common name in NZ is "bungy" and I suggest a more qualified person should add this... maybe someone who watches New Zealand TV programs? or someone who is interested in this stuff. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 10:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The correct spelling is bungee from what I can see, from a bungee cord. Bungy looks like a spelling error or possibly an alternative spelling. This isn't really anything to do with NZ English. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Not really a spelling error. (See: [48][49][50][51]) This is clearly a regional (NZ English) spelling of 'bungee'. This is similar to the regional spelling of fjord. This is worth noting in the article. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 10:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

(ec)

Bungy is now the normal spelling in NZ English which does have some unique spellings (see also: fiord). Checking the Papers Past archive of the Press it seems that the -y spelling came into fashion in 1989 (mentions of bungee cords themselves go back to 1956). Possibly under the influence of the bungy jumping company? - the Companies Register shows Bungy International Limited (now Bungy New Zealand Limited) as having first been incorporated in January 1989. Daveosaurus (talk) 10:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I saw the connection with the company and thought that should be considered the commercial name rather than a normal word. I think it depends whether the phrase 'bungee/bungy jump' refers to what the company does or to the general activity. I don't think 'bungee/bungy is copyrighted. Bungy being the name of the company means bungy is more likely to be used in NZ, but calling it NZE is stretching the cord a bit I think. I think calling bungy an alternative spelling of bungee is a better description.Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

It is now the normal spelling in NZ English. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 02:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

It is an alternative spelling world-wide and the usual spelling in NZ English. Bungy/bungee itself isn't copyrighted (its article suggests that the word's derivation is unknown but it first appeared in the 1930s) and I'm not sure if Hackett's ever managed to copyright "bungy jump" either - it seems to have become so popular so quickly it might have caught their lawyers on the hop. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Jumping in on this late, but just to note that I'm reasonably confident that such short phrases such as "bungy" or "bungy jump" don't meet the threshold for copyright anyway. There are, however, a few trademarks, including under AJ Hackett, using "bungy". I wouldn't be surprised if they chose to use that spelling to avoid their trademark applications being rejected as too descriptive.

I think it's entirely possible that the prominence of "bungy jumping" as promoted by AJ Hackett in this country may have influenced how we spell the word. Then again, it could just be a little quirk of NZ English.-Radicuil (talk) 13:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

True. I think we have reached a point where 'bungy' has entered en-NZ. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 13:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Just want some advice

@Turnagra, @Daveosaurus, @Cloventt. I think New Zealand has reached a point where "spelled and learned" are acceptable and should be the author(s) of the article choice on what spelling to use. In current times, I 'learned' & 'spelled' is becoming more predominant (not just in NZ). See this. I think this should be reflected on Wikipedia instead of continuing using a British spelling. Maybe people who use 'learnt' and 'spelt' were taught in British English (not me). This is Similar to encyclopedia or encyclopaedia in NZ English.

Also, User:PanaMitsu. Don't interact with this post since I'm committed to not interacting with you. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 04:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

My initial neutral view is both are possible but -nt is preferable to -ed based on what I am used to, which presumably makes it a NZ-US split. One point though is that learned has a different meaning with a different pronunciation, like around fifty other words in English. (no diacretic needed). Roger 8 Roger (talk) 07:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

("I learned Latin at school" - "He was a learned man") Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Gov and sources use both. Hence why there is no recommended spelling in NZ English re "spelled" or "spelt". Alexeyevitch^(talk) 07:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

[52][53][54][55][56]. Both spellings (incl. burned, learned, spoiled) are acceptable in NZ English. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 00:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)