May 6, 2008 was election day, when American voters in the first district of Mississippi elected Travis Childers to the House of Representatives in a special election. 22 May, 2008, was polling day, when English voters in the constituency of Crewe and Nantwich elected Edward Timpson to the House of Commons in a by-election.
At first glance, you might think those two sentences describe different types of events. But each of these sets of voters did the same thing: they filled a vacancy in the lower house of the legislative body. The events were similar even down to the level that, in each case, voters registered a protest against an unpopular leader by awarding to the opposition party a seat that had been considered safe for the leader’s party.
This is further proof, if any were needed, that George Bernard Shaw was correct in saying that “England and America are two countries separated by a common language.“ Political language is no exception to this rule. As an introduction to a series of posts on the British political system, and how it differs from the American system, I will examine some of those differences in political language.
At first glance, you might think those two sentences describe different types of events. But each of these sets of voters did the same thing: they filled a vacancy in the lower house of the legislative body. The events were similar even down to the level that, in each case, voters registered a protest against an unpopular leader by awarding to the opposition party a seat that had been considered safe for the leader’s party.
This is further proof, if any were needed, that George Bernard Shaw was correct in saying that “England and America are two countries separated by a common language.“ Political language is no exception to this rule. As an introduction to a series of posts on the British political system, and how it differs from the American system, I will examine some of those differences in political language.
OK, so we’ve established that what we Americans call election day, district, House of Representatives and special election, the British call polling day, constituency, House of Commons and by-election, respectively. What else is there?
The U.K.’s top legislative body is the “Parliament” and the U.S.’s is the “Congress”. The upper houses of those bodies are “House of Lords” and “Senate”, respectively.
Job titles differ. The “Prime Minister” is Britain’s head of government. As I’ll describe in a later post, that role is not identical to that of the American “President”, but it’s close. One of the U.K. titles that Americans find quite colorful (or as they would write it, “colourful”), is “Chancellor of the Exchequer”, roughly equivalent to our “Secretary of the Treasury”.
One more note on titles: we continue to call someone by their title, after they leave office. Our living former presidents are called “President Carter”, “President Bush”, and “President Clinton”, and each of them will forever be addressed as “Mr. President”. However, when the British refer to “the prime minister” or “the chancellor” (they usually leave out the “of the Exchequer” part), they’re describing the current holder of the office. As we will see later, their former officeholders are often given titles such as “Lord So-and-So” and “Lady Such-and-Such”.
Just to confuse you further, the same word or phrase sometimes has different meanings. We both speak of “general elections”, but we use that phrase somewhat differently. In the U.K. it describes an election for all of the seats in the House of Commons, and is contrasted to a by-election which, again, is used to fill a vacancy in one seat. In the U.S. we differentiate between “general elections” and “primary elections”. The British don’t have primary elections (more later on the process by which their parties choose candidates for the House of Commons).
Here’s one difference regarding parliamentary procedure. When the British “table” a proposal, they put it into consideration. For us, to table a proposal means to take it out of consideration. So, on that note, I’ll table (in the American sense) this discussion, and move on.
The U.K.’s top legislative body is the “Parliament” and the U.S.’s is the “Congress”. The upper houses of those bodies are “House of Lords” and “Senate”, respectively.
Job titles differ. The “Prime Minister” is Britain’s head of government. As I’ll describe in a later post, that role is not identical to that of the American “President”, but it’s close. One of the U.K. titles that Americans find quite colorful (or as they would write it, “colourful”), is “Chancellor of the Exchequer”, roughly equivalent to our “Secretary of the Treasury”.
One more note on titles: we continue to call someone by their title, after they leave office. Our living former presidents are called “President Carter”, “President Bush”, and “President Clinton”, and each of them will forever be addressed as “Mr. President”. However, when the British refer to “the prime minister” or “the chancellor” (they usually leave out the “of the Exchequer” part), they’re describing the current holder of the office. As we will see later, their former officeholders are often given titles such as “Lord So-and-So” and “Lady Such-and-Such”.
Just to confuse you further, the same word or phrase sometimes has different meanings. We both speak of “general elections”, but we use that phrase somewhat differently. In the U.K. it describes an election for all of the seats in the House of Commons, and is contrasted to a by-election which, again, is used to fill a vacancy in one seat. In the U.S. we differentiate between “general elections” and “primary elections”. The British don’t have primary elections (more later on the process by which their parties choose candidates for the House of Commons).
Here’s one difference regarding parliamentary procedure. When the British “table” a proposal, they put it into consideration. For us, to table a proposal means to take it out of consideration. So, on that note, I’ll table (in the American sense) this discussion, and move on.
No comments:
Post a Comment