LeicaPassion Posted May 19, 2013 Share #21 Â Posted May 19, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Stores are getting hit, even in an "upscale" US suburb. An Apple Store has been burglarized twice. Yesterday, at an AT&T cellphone store, an armed security guard had to open the locked door for customers to enter. Last week, an elderly woman was robbed of $200,000 in jewelry and cash on Michigan Avenue in Chicago in broad daylight. The list goes on and on. We need to be very aware of our surroundings when using our Leicas. Insurance is a must. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 19, 2013 Posted May 19, 2013 Hi LeicaPassion, Take a look here Another theft from a dealer to report. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
farnz Posted May 19, 2013 Share #22 Â Posted May 19, 2013 ... An Apple Store has been burglarized twice. ... I'm not taking a pop at you, LeicaPassion, because I've heard it elsewhere but the word "burgled" is sufficient and shorter than the torturous, bolted-together word "burglarized" so how has it managed to enter common usage? Â What's next: the "burglarization" at the house next door occurred in the early hours? The poor language has to put up with a lot of abuse. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaPassion Posted May 19, 2013 Share #23 Â Posted May 19, 2013 I did not check the OED. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted May 19, 2013 Share #24 Â Posted May 19, 2013 We could get into the semantics of "s" versus "z", eg "burglarised". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 19, 2013 Share #25  Posted May 19, 2013 I'm with Pete.  "Burgled".  Regards,  Bill  Sent from another Galaxy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaPassion Posted May 20, 2013 Share #26 Â Posted May 20, 2013 We are way off topic. I suggest that you look up the word, burglarize, in the dictionary. It's there, and with a "z". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 20, 2013 Share #27 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) interesting that the alleged thief has a newspaper in the CCTV images- this is a classic pick-pocket prop. Magicians and pickpockets know all about misdirection: if the eyes cannot see the hands (because they are hidden behind a newspaper) the mind does not apprehend when the goods miraculously 'disappear' I wonder if it is destined for the black market- or the 'geezer' is a Leicaphile... Â oh- and in Australia (and in my Australian Maquarie dictionary) it is spelt 'burglarise' NOT burglarize- just like we spell 'realised' not 'realized' and 'colour' not 'color'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 20, 2013 Share #28 Â Posted May 20, 2013 ... because I've heard it elsewhere but the word "burgled" is sufficient and shorter than the torturous, bolted-together word "burglarized" so how has it managed to enter common usage? Â Sorry, Pete, but you offer false etymology in this case. Both words derive from near 1870, with most sources dating 'burglarized' as the first American usage (US and Canada), with 'burgled' occurring a year or so later, back-formed from the term burglar. Â This has been a known distinction across the ocean (pond as you might say), with the term 'burgle' often receiving giggles (burgle, giggle....just the sound makes us smile) on this side. Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaPassion Posted May 20, 2013 Share #29 Â Posted May 20, 2013 In the U.S., "z" is used. Let's get back to our discussion about Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick De Marco Posted May 20, 2013 Share #30 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Where does it end? 'A burglarizer broke in in'? 'I photographized her'? Â There is some argument for the word burglarize - I understand because burgle was originally a corruption of the word burglar in English, so the Americans decided to have a more 'rational' approach, but it is very ugly and unnecessary in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted May 20, 2013 Share #31 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Sorry, Pete, but you offer false etymology in this case. ... I offered no etymology, false or otherwise, Jeff. (Common usage differs from current usage.) Â Â But, yes, let's get back on topic. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 20, 2013 Share #32 Â Posted May 20, 2013 I super-deplorify the un-necessary mangleization of perfectly good words. Â Redundantified letters, prefixes and suffixes appear apparently to be super-popular these days particularlymost among the linguistically insecure. Professor Unwin would feel right at home. Â "pre-order". "Minty". "Lense". "LCD display" "nuclearization" Â The Shrub has a lot to answerate for. Â Regards, Â Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 20, 2013 Share #33 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Yes, but burglarize is not a new word; it's perfectly acceptable if American English is your preferred language and I think it is a pity that the poster using the verb has been criticised for doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 20, 2013 Author Share #34 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Does it mean that a "burglar" is a "burglarizer" in the US, though? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 20, 2013 Share #35 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Does it mean that a "burglar" is a "burglarizer" in the US, though? Â Well, the suspect in question is a 'burglarizer digitzer'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted May 20, 2013 Share #36 Â Posted May 20, 2013 ... I think it is a pity that the poster using the verb has been criticised for doing so. He wasn't; I made that clear. Â Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 20, 2013 Author Share #37 Â Posted May 20, 2013 I think that the difference in British and American English is a healthy thing, but Churchill was (as usual) right. Â 10 years ago I was at Seaworld in Florida. An American asked me what the time was and I told him. I said that it was "Twenty-five to two". Because it was. Â He looked at me as if I had just fallen out of a tree. He took my wrist and looked at my watch himself... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted May 20, 2013 Share #38 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Oh dear, discussions on transatlantic common usage differences are fraught with difficulty. Before you know it someone will mention 'fanny'............oops, I think I just did . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldh Posted May 20, 2013 Share #39 Â Posted May 20, 2013 In any case it is not burglary, the legal definition of which (a) requires breaking and entering and ( must be at night. It's plain theft in any language. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted May 20, 2013 Share #40 Â Posted May 20, 2013 Pointing out the shortcomings of American English to Americans is part of our patriotic duty. Â Part of theirs is in being confused as to why we do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.