Hey British guys, I love this accent!!!

Adam   Wed Dec 21, 2005 6:34 pm GMT
"Leicester and Leicestershire......more Northern than Southern? If you want a good example of this (native) Leicester accent listen to Gary Lineker."

The Leicester accent is strange. It's a Midlands city. It not in the North and it's not in the South. It's inbetween. So its people have ab accent that is half-Northern accent and half-Southern accent. When they speak, they sound just like a Southerner sounds when they try to speak with a Lancashire or Yorkshire accent, or vice versa. In a sentence, they pronounce some of the words as a Northerner would and some as a Southerner would.
Nora   Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:12 pm GMT
You should leave this site slut and don't come back. This is my domain asshole. Your lesbian slut friend Uriel should go to.
nora   Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:07 am GMT
Laura,...... I think we need to cut the thread on you. Clean you up and most of all grow up. You do not need to advertise what you are and who you are. It's not nice..... Let this site be for intellectuals. I am learning your language and culture, give me a chance. Merry Christmas to you LAURA...

Here's some thought:
Poor Minds Talks about People
Average Mind Talks about Events
Great Minds Talks about Ideas.....

To all: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!!!
Pete   Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:28 am GMT
>>Greg Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:46 pm GMT
I have a question here. Is the British accent a common and neutral one? Where all the American accent are used?<<

The British accent?? There's no such thing as "the British accent"...
Guest   Sat Dec 24, 2005 5:11 am GMT
<I have a question here. Is the British accent a common and neutral one? Where all the American accent are used?<<

The British accent?? There's no such thing as "the British accent"... >

Oh ok so you don't a sort of 'General British English' like the GAE?
Adam   Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:58 am GMT
Prince Charles has said that when (or, even, IF) he became King, he doesn't want to be King Charles III to avoid unhappy associations with some of the bloodiest periods in the monarchy’s history. Charles I, the ONLY monarch to ever be executed, was beheaded during the English Civil War in 1649. England then became a Republic under the leadership of Cromwell, until the Monarchy was restored in 1660, when Charles II became King. He became known as the Merry Monarch because he had a string of mistresses, including the orange-seller Nell Gwyn. And Scottish supporters of Bonnie Prince Charlie called him Charles III.

The Times December 24, 2005

Call me George, suggests Charles
By Andrew Pierce

THE Prince of Wales has discussed rejecting the title Charles III when he becomes King to avoid unhappy associations with some of the bloodiest periods in the monarchy’s history.

The Prince’s favourite alternative name is George VII, in honour of his grandfather (George VI) — one of the best-loved monarchs of the past century.

The Times has spoken to two trusted friends of the Prince, who both said that the change to George has been considered seriously. One said: “There have been many conversations with the Prince about this. It is an assumption among us all that it will happen.

“The name Charles is tinged with so much sadness.”

The other source said: “They [the Royal Family] will decide at the time, but he has talked about George.”

The name Charles is regarded as jinxed in some royal circles. Charles I was the only monarch to be executed. His beheading in 1649, after the English Civil War, brought about the short-lived republic under Oliver Cromwell.

Charles II, the son of Charles I, returned to the throne at the Restoration in 1660, after spending 18 years in exile overseas, but was mocked as the Merry Monarch because he had a string of mistresses, including the orange-seller Nell Gwyn.

There is sensitivity in royal circles about Bonnie Prince Charlie, the Young Pretender, who was known as Charles III by his supporters. Despite his defeat at the Battle of Culloden in 1746, he is still seen as a Scottish romantic figure.

The Prince of Wales, who was christened Charles Philip Arthur George, is a passionate supporter of the Union and spends most of his holidays in Scotland.

A Clarence House spokesman said that there had been long-term thinking about the Coronation, but that nothing had been discussed officially about changing the Prince’s title. He added: “One of the questions that we have asked is what he will be known as. The decision will be taken at the time.”

When he ascends the throne the new King will convene an Accession Council — a meeting of the full Privy Council.

It is the only time that the full Privy Council, which includes ministers and senior bishops, meets. It will then be decreed by the council what title the new King will take.

Were the Prince to change his formal, or regnal, title he would be following a tradition begun by Queen Victoria in 1837, who was born Alexandrina (so should have been Queen Alexandrina). Four of the past six monarchs have changed their name, including George VI, the father of the Queen, who was christened Prince Albert.

Prince Charles was only 4 when his grandfather died but he was very close to his grandmother, the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother.

The issue of changing the regnal title has been raised at Clarence House but the name is not yet part of any formal planning for the sucession.

One senior Royal official said that there had been an assumption in informal talks about the accession that the Prince would keep the name Charles.

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, a genealogist from Cracroft’s Peerage, said: “There has been a tradition over the last century for the regnal title to be different to the christian name. The change would make sense.

“Monarchs called Charles have not had much luck. One was beheaded, one was in exile, and one was a pretender to the throne.

“While the Prince of Wales is known throughout the world as Charles, there is enormous goodwill to the name George. George VI was an outstanding and popular King who took over in the immediate aftermath of the abdication crisis and rallied his people during the war. King George and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother were wonderful. I think George VII and Queen Camilla sound wonderful, too.”

When the marriage was announced of the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles, Clarence House said that she would be known as the Duchess of Cornwall after the marriage and that it was “intended” that she would be known as Princess Consort when the Prince of Wales succeeds his mother to the throne.

If, however, public opinion were amenable, she could yet become Queen Camilla. Significantly, there was no such announcement about the title by which her husband would be known.

Adam   Sat Dec 24, 2005 12:47 pm GMT
George is a popular name in the Royal Family. A succession of Georges ruled between 1714 and 1830 - from George I to George IV.

The Times December 24, 2005

Change of name will follow a long royal tradition
By Patrick Foster and Andrew Pierce
Charles’s decision is not an original one

IF THE Prince of Wales were to adopt the title of George VII he would be the fourth of the past six monarchs to rule under a name by which he was not commonly known.

The practice is regarded by royal genealogists as relatively modern. The monarch can choose to change title without the consent of Parliament or the prime minister.

The tradition began with Queen Victoria. Her mother, Victoria, the Duchess of Kent, wanted her also to be called Victoria. But the Prince Regent, out of deference to his cousin, Tsar Alexander I of Russia, insisted that she be named Alexandrina Victoria. When William IV died in 1837 the new young Queen opted to be known by the name that her mother had wished for her. She was the first Queen Victoria and her 64-year reign makes her the longest-serving monarch. Her eldest son, who was christened Albert Edward, followed his mother in choosing to reign under his second forename. Queen Victoria had always intended her son, known as Bertie, to become King Albert Edward I. But on his succession he decreed that he would be crowned Edward VII because he wanted his father to be the only Albert to be remembered in history.

Edward VII, when he was Prince of Wales, was known as the Playboy Prince. For 12 years he had an affair with Alice Keppel — the great-grandmother of Camilla Parker Bowles — who was at his bedside when he died in 1910. When Camilla, then 25, met Prince Charles for the first time, she is reputed to have said: “Our ancestors were lovers. So how about it?” He was succeeded by his second son, George V, who reigned under his given name. Edward’s first son, Prince Albert Victor, had died in 1892 putting George Frederick Ernest Albert directly in line to the throne. His wife, Princess May of Teck, had been christened Victoria Mary Augusta Louise Olga Pauline Claudine Agnes. She was known as Queen Mary.

The next monarch to rule under a title by which he was not commonly known was Edward VIII. Although baptised Edward, the King was known to friends and family as David, the last of his seven forenames. Edward’s reign lasted only 325 days because of his refusal to give up Wallis Simpson, his American lover, who had been twice divorced. He was succeeded by his younger brother, Prince Albert Frederick Arthur George, the Duke of York. He had never expected to be King and chose to rule under his fourth christening name, George. In private Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother referred to the King as “my beloved Bertie”.

The King’s eldest daughter was christened Elizabeth Alexandra Mary after her mother. Before marriage the Queen Mother was Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons. In February 1952 the Princess became Elizabeth II. Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, from Cracroft’s Peerage, said that the decision to change regnal titles was a matter for the new monarch and no one else. “They of course consult their ministers and the prime minister of the day. But it is a personal decision,” he said. “They would by convention choose one of their own forenames.

“I think Prince Charles would be much more likely to go for George rather than his other two forenames. He would be the first King Arthur and be the first King Philip. I think George VII sounds better. It is a popular name within the Royal Family and would be a tribute to the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, whose husband also chose the same regnal title.”

Roots in the past


The name of England’s patron saint is originally derived from the Greek name Georgios, meaning “farmer” or, more literally, “tiller of the earth”.

The name was rare until the house of Hanover came to power in 1714, whereupon Georges ruled for 116 unbroken years.


Ultimately derived from the Old German word karl, meaning “man”, with the additional implications of valour and self-governance.

The historic bearer of the name was the Holy Roman Emperor, Charlemagne.

The soldier, the sailor and the farmer

George I

Born 1660, reigned 1714-1727

The first of the Hanoverians. Succeeded to the English throne on the death of Queen Anne. Never learnt English and spent most of his reign in Hanover. The post of Prime Minister was created to cope with his long absences from England and first occupied by Robert Walpole. George arrived in England without his wife, Sophia, who had been imprisoned for adultery, but with two mistresses.

George II

Born 1683, reigned 1727-1760

The last British king to command his armies on the battlefield, defeating the French in 1743 at Dettingen. Loved opera, notably Handel. Allowed his domineering and intelligent wife, Caroline, huge influence over affairs of state.

George III

Born 1738, reigned 1760-1820

The first Hanoverian born in England and speak the language. Best remembered for his madness, now ascribed to porphyria. George III oversaw the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, after his brothers married in secret, which gave the Soveriegn veto power over marriages of most lineal descendents of George II. Known as “Farmer George” because of his interest in agriculture. Was King during the War of Independence.

George IV

Born 1762, reigned 1820-1830

His marriage to a Catholic in 1785, secret and without his father’s permission, was subsequently declared void. Had many mistresses and such hatred between him and his second wife, Caroline, that she took their daughter Charlotte to Italy in 1796, returning only in a vain attempt to be crowned Queen. George barred her from his coronation.

George V

Born 1865, reigned 1910-1936

Ascending the throne during the 1910 budget crisis, George V also ruled through the First World War, during which he replaced the family name, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, with Windsor. A professional naval officer. Started the tradition of the monarch’s annual Christmas broadcast in 1932.

George VI

Born 1895, reigned 1936-1952

Succeeded when his brother, Edward VIII, abdicated. George VI had a terrible stammer, which compounded his natural shyness.

A well-loved king who ruled through the Second World War, George went as far as practising firing his revolver, saying he would defend Buckingham Palace to the death.

Nora   Wed Dec 28, 2005 7:23 pm GMT
Laura, where are you? I wanted to have one more fight with you. You slut, you bitch, if you dare, come back to this thread.
Nora   Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:53 pm GMT
I would like to correct this message that was written December 28. I did not write this message for Laura. and I am not looking for fight with anybody. I f anybody wants to destroy this site because Laura has got an attitude, please bring your business somewhere.

Please, anybody out there do not mess this intelligent and intellectual conversation between people who are astute in the subject matter they want to discuss about. Please see my write up Dec. 22.

Somebody has to end this silly, ugly, and slime conversation......

Happy New Year......
Laura Braun   Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:03 pm GMT
(I f anybody wants to destroy this site because Laura has got an attitude, please bring your business somewhere.)

Oh so I got the ATTITUDE PROBLEM now? Look here you retard I did not refer nor insulted you in anyway. But the way your message has reinforce your stupity. The only thing I brought to Antimoon other from this very message is Language based questions.

(Please, anybody out there do not mess this intelligent and intellectual conversation between people who are astute in the subject matter they want to discuss about. Please see my write up Dec. 22. )

Yeah I see how 'intelligent' you can be or stupity as normal sane people would perfer to call it. You are narrowminded and such a dramaqueen to blow everything bigger to what they are really are.

I think its you who have the problem Nora.
Laura Braun   Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:10 pm GMT
why should you write instead of me, I don't know you, please, please don't do this, if I wish to write it I will write. There are life to live.
Laura Braun   Wed Dec 28, 2005 10:13 pm GMT
You don't know what has happened, I Do not want to remember.
Laura Braun   Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:42 am GMT
You know what I think. Antimoon sucks. Will tell you the reason. There aren't forums as antimoon. Even in my small country people are honest they never used such words as up above. They don't do it. Everyone has his own account and can write under his name, but it's not anonimous. Noone can offence noone using other name, but his own name. There are rules. What has happened here????
Kirk   Thu Dec 29, 2005 2:19 am GMT
Laura (and anyone else), unfortunately the owners of antimoon do not allow even for optional registration and accounts here so a small set of trolls keeps on trying to ruin it for others. Usually it's pretty obvious when a troll is impersonating someone so most of us just try and ignore the trolls. I know it's annoying but for now it's best to just ignore them...

If you're interested in language sites that have user accounts, I would recommend something like langcafe:


which is actually made up of a lot of Antimooners (and former Antimooners) who got tired of this forum's inadequacies. Unilang is also another good forum that I'd recommend. Hope that helps!

Damian in Edinburgh   Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:02 pm GMT
The whole business of whatever name the Prince of Wales wishes to be called in the event of his accession to the British throne may be academic.....he bloke could be over 80 years old before that happens in the normal course of events should his Mummy live as long as her Mummy did. (That's how they do and did call each other's mothers apparently).

At least his son William speaks a more "normal less painful to the ear" type of English. So I vote for a King William V with a touch of Estuary rather than a senile King George VII...or Charles III..or whatever...with his awful way of speaking.