This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Why, when talking about the Olympics, is our team called "Team GB" ?
Is it just people being lazy and shortening "Team GB & NI", and if so why not call it "Team UK" ?
Are Northern Irish athletes not included in it, pretty sure they're not in the Irish team, or have I got that wrong ?
It's certainly the Union Jack that is raised for any winners, and the UJ is "sort of" incorporated into the kit design.
If I was Norhern Irish I wouldn't be too impressed at being "excluded"
Is it just people being lazy and shortening "Team GB & NI", and if so why not call it "Team UK" ?
Are Northern Irish athletes not included in it, pretty sure they're not in the Irish team, or have I got that wrong ?
It's certainly the Union Jack that is raised for any winners, and the UJ is "sort of" incorporated into the kit design.
If I was Norhern Irish I wouldn't be too impressed at being "excluded"
In reply to steelbru: I thought the distinction was made between UK & NI, and that GB encompassed them both. Anyway, which sounds better 'united kingdom' or 'GREAT britain'? I know which I prefer
In reply to Madden: The full proper name of our great country is 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' so technically it should be Team UK or Team GB&NI, but that's a mouthful.
In reply to steelbru:
Ireland is present in the Union Jack - the cross of St Patrick - just as Scotland (cross of St Andrew) and England (cross of St George) are, it's the Welsh who seem to be missing out - a cross of St David could be included but for some reason it never has been.
As said above I think Great Britain is better than United Kingdom, it is both an older name and one that puts less emphasis on the monarchy, so maybe as the present monarch is getting on a bit, they thought it was a safer bet to use GB than UK, imagine the cost if she passed on before the games and all the kit had to be redone!
Ireland is present in the Union Jack - the cross of St Patrick - just as Scotland (cross of St Andrew) and England (cross of St George) are, it's the Welsh who seem to be missing out - a cross of St David could be included but for some reason it never has been.
As said above I think Great Britain is better than United Kingdom, it is both an older name and one that puts less emphasis on the monarchy, so maybe as the present monarch is getting on a bit, they thought it was a safer bet to use GB than UK, imagine the cost if she passed on before the games and all the kit had to be redone!
In reply to coinneach:
The "great" is not a value judgement, it is to distinguish the bigger Britain ie. the British Isles from "Little Britain", ie. the present day Brittany which is now part of France - at the time they had similar populations. As for "United", it's true that between working class and ruling class there can never be any true unity, which may also be a reason GB was preferred to UK.
> (In reply to Madden)
>
> Neither "united" or "great"
>
> Neither "united" or "great"
The "great" is not a value judgement, it is to distinguish the bigger Britain ie. the British Isles from "Little Britain", ie. the present day Brittany which is now part of France - at the time they had similar populations. As for "United", it's true that between working class and ruling class there can never be any true unity, which may also be a reason GB was preferred to UK.
In reply to Bruce Hooker: However (i'm going to make this childish point again), 'Great' does sound kinda... great. Dunnit?
In reply to Madden: I suspect that has a lot to do with it. Team GB makes a better sound. The whole thing us about marketing. Which agency came up with it?
In reply to Madden:
Well perhaps but it clearly offends some people as they think it implies a sentiment of superiority.... which it may to some if they don't know the origins of the name.
It's probably too late to change now before the Olympics but the "United Republic of Britain" - URB - sounds better to me, although there would certainly be a load of Moaning Minnies who would find something wrong with that too... take a look at Al's thread to see just how touchy a lot of them are.
> 'Great' does sound kinda... great. Dunnit?
Well perhaps but it clearly offends some people as they think it implies a sentiment of superiority.... which it may to some if they don't know the origins of the name.
It's probably too late to change now before the Olympics but the "United Republic of Britain" - URB - sounds better to me, although there would certainly be a load of Moaning Minnies who would find something wrong with that too... take a look at Al's thread to see just how touchy a lot of them are.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
I don't think you need to be a Moaning Minnie to comment that Britain isn't a republic for a start, of which you, more than most, are very well aware!
I don't think you need to be a Moaning Minnie to comment that Britain isn't a republic for a start, of which you, more than most, are very well aware!
In reply to steelbru: To fill a couple of the posters in, the 'Great' is a geographical term for the main island... Get your facts right!
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Not yet, even I realise that, which is why I said it was probably too late to change for the Olympics... However when the choice becomes between Charlie the Third and a good old fashioned Republic who know which way people may turn? They might, in their panic, even go the whole hog and call the country "The United Republican Democracy" - which would clarify what we all stand for nicely - it would look good as a sticker on the back of the car too.
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker)
>
> I don't think you need to be a Moaning Minnie to comment that Britain isn't a republic for a start,
>
> I don't think you need to be a Moaning Minnie to comment that Britain isn't a republic for a start,
Not yet, even I realise that, which is why I said it was probably too late to change for the Olympics... However when the choice becomes between Charlie the Third and a good old fashioned Republic who know which way people may turn? They might, in their panic, even go the whole hog and call the country "The United Republican Democracy" - which would clarify what we all stand for nicely - it would look good as a sticker on the back of the car too.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
What's this 'we'? I thought you lived in republican democracy already?
It's not that I'm an enthusiastic monarchist mind, I just rather doubt whether we'd be all that united, particularly republican or necessarily any more democratic in the absence of a monarchy.
What's this 'we'? I thought you lived in republican democracy already?
It's not that I'm an enthusiastic monarchist mind, I just rather doubt whether we'd be all that united, particularly republican or necessarily any more democratic in the absence of a monarchy.
In reply to steelbru:
Firstly its the Union Flag, not Union Jack. Its only a Union Jack when on a jackstaff of a British Warship.
As for The whole Team GB, i personally reckon its down to marketing as Team GB sounds far better than Team UK or Team GB&NI
Also why change something thats been one way for so long?
Firstly its the Union Flag, not Union Jack. Its only a Union Jack when on a jackstaff of a British Warship.
As for The whole Team GB, i personally reckon its down to marketing as Team GB sounds far better than Team UK or Team GB&NI
Also why change something thats been one way for so long?
In reply to Madden:
Nope.
Great Britain is the largest of the British Isles, containing only England, Wales and Scotland.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland contains Great Britain, plus Northern Ireland and a number of other islands around its coast.
Wiki seems to confirm that the term is indeed incorrect and should really be UK.
Neil
Nope.
Great Britain is the largest of the British Isles, containing only England, Wales and Scotland.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland contains Great Britain, plus Northern Ireland and a number of other islands around its coast.
Wiki seems to confirm that the term is indeed incorrect and should really be UK.
Neil
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Apart from that the United Kingdom is, as the name suggests, a kingdom and is not a republic.
Neil
Apart from that the United Kingdom is, as the name suggests, a kingdom and is not a republic.
Neil
In reply to steelbru: Having had this debate with my Northern Irish Husband, we can both agree that it is Team GB, as those from NI can elect weather they compete for GB or Ireland. so members of the Irish team should be Ireland and NI, but Team GB should be Team GB & NI.
as the above would be too confusing it is shortened to Team GB and Ireland to avoid any confusion the double mention of NI may cause.
as the above would be too confusing it is shortened to Team GB and Ireland to avoid any confusion the double mention of NI may cause.
In reply to steelbru:
It is only a matter of time until the athletes of the Republic of Mercia take their place on the podium while the defeated remnants of "Great" Britain look on in envy...
It is only a matter of time until the athletes of the Republic of Mercia take their place on the podium while the defeated remnants of "Great" Britain look on in envy...
In reply to RCJ:
Wrong. The Admiralty has disagreed with you since 1902.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Flag#Terminology
> Firstly its the Union Flag, not Union Jack. Its only a Union Jack when on a jackstaff of a British Warship.
Wrong. The Admiralty has disagreed with you since 1902.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Flag#Terminology
In reply to steelbru:
Isn't there also distinction with the Channel Islands and Isle of Man? I can't remember which way round it is but they are part of one but not the other. I suspect it's Great Britain they belong to and not the United Kingdom?
Isn't there also distinction with the Channel Islands and Isle of Man? I can't remember which way round it is but they are part of one but not the other. I suspect it's Great Britain they belong to and not the United Kingdom?
In reply to Vince McNally:
My passport says The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, either GB or Uk do me just fine but I wish they would drop the Northern Ireland seperate bit. It's like saying the United States of America and California or something..
> (In reply to coinneach)
>
> I like the United Kingdom of Great Britain
>
> I like the United Kingdom of Great Britain
My passport says The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, either GB or Uk do me just fine but I wish they would drop the Northern Ireland seperate bit. It's like saying the United States of America and California or something..
In reply to Al Evans:
No, it isn't, because "Great Britain" is only one (the largest) of the British Isles.
You could make it something like "The United Kingdom of the British Isles" or simply "The United Kingdom of Britain", but unless Northern Ireland secedes "The United Kingdom of Great Britain" would exclude a number of its parts.
Neil
No, it isn't, because "Great Britain" is only one (the largest) of the British Isles.
You could make it something like "The United Kingdom of the British Isles" or simply "The United Kingdom of Britain", but unless Northern Ireland secedes "The United Kingdom of Great Britain" would exclude a number of its parts.
Neil
In reply to Trangia:
"The Isle of Man ( /ˈmæn/; Manx: Ellan Vannin,[5] pronounced [ˈɛlʲən ˈvanɪn]), otherwise known simply as Mann (Manx: Mannin, IPA: [ˈmanɪn]), is a self-governing British Crown Dependency, located in the Irish Sea between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland, within the British Isles. The head of state is Queen Elizabeth II, who holds the title of Lord of Mann. The Lord of Mann is represented by a Lieutenant Governor. The island is not part of the United Kingdom, but its foreign relations and defence are the responsibility of the UK Government. Although the United Kingdom does not usually interfere in the island's domestic matters, its "good government" is ultimately the responsibility of the Crown (that is, in practice, the Government of the United Kingdom"
"The Channel Islands (Norman: Îles d'la Manche, French: Îles Anglo-Normandes or Îles de la Manche) are an archipelago of British Crown Dependencies in the English Channel, off the French coast of Normandy. They include two separate bailiwicks: the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Bailiwick of Jersey. They are considered the remnants of the Duchy of Normandy, and are not part of the United Kingdom.[1] They have a total population of about 158,000 and their respective capitals, St. Peter Port and St. Helier, have populations of 16,488 and 28,310. The total area of the islands is 194 km².
The Bailiwicks have been administered separately since the late 13th century; common institutions are the exception rather than the rule. The two Bailiwicks have no common laws, no common elections, and no common representative body (although their politicians consult regularly)."
"The Isle of Man ( /ˈmæn/; Manx: Ellan Vannin,[5] pronounced [ˈɛlʲən ˈvanɪn]), otherwise known simply as Mann (Manx: Mannin, IPA: [ˈmanɪn]), is a self-governing British Crown Dependency, located in the Irish Sea between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland, within the British Isles. The head of state is Queen Elizabeth II, who holds the title of Lord of Mann. The Lord of Mann is represented by a Lieutenant Governor. The island is not part of the United Kingdom, but its foreign relations and defence are the responsibility of the UK Government. Although the United Kingdom does not usually interfere in the island's domestic matters, its "good government" is ultimately the responsibility of the Crown (that is, in practice, the Government of the United Kingdom"
"The Channel Islands (Norman: Îles d'la Manche, French: Îles Anglo-Normandes or Îles de la Manche) are an archipelago of British Crown Dependencies in the English Channel, off the French coast of Normandy. They include two separate bailiwicks: the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Bailiwick of Jersey. They are considered the remnants of the Duchy of Normandy, and are not part of the United Kingdom.[1] They have a total population of about 158,000 and their respective capitals, St. Peter Port and St. Helier, have populations of 16,488 and 28,310. The total area of the islands is 194 km².
The Bailiwicks have been administered separately since the late 13th century; common institutions are the exception rather than the rule. The two Bailiwicks have no common laws, no common elections, and no common representative body (although their politicians consult regularly)."
In reply to steelbru:
I personal think that Team GB as it is known should be changed to Team UK, however the three letters would still have to remain as GBR as this was stated when the country first entered the Olympics.
To change the letters would involve a new 'country' to be formed as was in Germany's case GER, from East Germany GDR and West Germany FRG.
I personal think that Team GB as it is known should be changed to Team UK, however the three letters would still have to remain as GBR as this was stated when the country first entered the Olympics.
To change the letters would involve a new 'country' to be formed as was in Germany's case GER, from East Germany GDR and West Germany FRG.
I suspect it is just to make things easier.
You can call the GB Team or member "British" but as far as I am aware there is no such term for the UK. "And on the right we have the United Kingdomer/United Kingdomish Joe Bloggs"
You can call the GB Team or member "British" but as far as I am aware there is no such term for the UK. "And on the right we have the United Kingdomer/United Kingdomish Joe Bloggs"
In reply to steelbru:
Incidentally, I once read we have the second longest country name in the world. Anyone know which is longer?
Incidentally, I once read we have the second longest country name in the world. Anyone know which is longer?
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Ireland is present in the Union Jack - the cross of St Patrick - just as Scotland (cross of St Andrew) and England (cross of St George) are, it's the Welsh who seem to be missing out - a cross of St David could be included but for some reason it never has been.
Can't we just stick a picture of a Swansea girl on the Union Jack like there is on the Welsh flag?
<Ducks>
Ireland is present in the Union Jack - the cross of St Patrick - just as Scotland (cross of St Andrew) and England (cross of St George) are, it's the Welsh who seem to be missing out - a cross of St David could be included but for some reason it never has been.
Can't we just stick a picture of a Swansea girl on the Union Jack like there is on the Welsh flag?
<Ducks>
In reply to Darron:
pmsl...I tried to put it in, but get an error from the website 'Please don't write verylongwordswithoutanyspaces'
...seems UKC doesn't want you to know
...but it's quite a bit shorter in English
I believe 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' is the longest in English.
pmsl...I tried to put it in, but get an error from the website 'Please don't write verylongwordswithoutanyspaces'
...seems UKC doesn't want you to know
...but it's quite a bit shorter in English
I believe 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' is the longest in English.
In reply to steelbru:
Oh and apparently in order to get into the WTO without upsetting the Chinese, the official name of Taiwan is:
"the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu (Chinese Taipei)"
Oh and apparently in order to get into the WTO without upsetting the Chinese, the official name of Taiwan is:
"the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu (Chinese Taipei)"
Longest one might be this - The sovereign military hospitalat order of saint john of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta (SMOM for short). Recognised as a state by the UN but doesn't actually have any territory apart from an office block in Rome.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
It's not that there has been some mysterious reason to omit a welsh element to the Union Flag, it's simply that there was never a historical reason to include it.
The precursor to our current flag (without St. Patrick's cross) was designed for James I / VI who was king of two separate kingdoms (England and Scotland) as his personal standard - often referred to as "the king's colours". The 1707 acts of union united these two kingdoms into "The United Kingdom of Great Britain" and the flag was adopted as a national emblem. Saint patrick's cross was added after the 1800 acts of union added Ireland to the kingdom to make "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland", and the national flag has remained unchanged (despite subsequent reduction in Irish Territory).
At all these unifying points in history, wales had no independence to cede to a united kingdom. Wales had been considered (by english kings) part of the Kingdom of England since the Normans conquest, and had been finally totally conquered by that nasty Longshanks chap (you know - the mean old king in braveheart) by the 1280's.
Now, we could retrospectively redesign our flag to include Wales (wouldn't a big dragon on the front look cool?) - but surely then we should also represent previously independent kingdoms like Northumbria (red and yellow stripes), Mercia (chuck in a yellow cross), Wessex (another dragon) and, god forbid, Essex (swords!)?
Now that would be a flag!
> (In reply to steelbru)
>
> Ireland is present in the Union Jack - the cross of St Patrick - just as Scotland (cross of St Andrew) and England (cross of St George) are, it's the Welsh who seem to be missing out - a cross of St David could be included but for some reason it never has been.
>
> Ireland is present in the Union Jack - the cross of St Patrick - just as Scotland (cross of St Andrew) and England (cross of St George) are, it's the Welsh who seem to be missing out - a cross of St David could be included but for some reason it never has been.
It's not that there has been some mysterious reason to omit a welsh element to the Union Flag, it's simply that there was never a historical reason to include it.
The precursor to our current flag (without St. Patrick's cross) was designed for James I / VI who was king of two separate kingdoms (England and Scotland) as his personal standard - often referred to as "the king's colours". The 1707 acts of union united these two kingdoms into "The United Kingdom of Great Britain" and the flag was adopted as a national emblem. Saint patrick's cross was added after the 1800 acts of union added Ireland to the kingdom to make "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland", and the national flag has remained unchanged (despite subsequent reduction in Irish Territory).
At all these unifying points in history, wales had no independence to cede to a united kingdom. Wales had been considered (by english kings) part of the Kingdom of England since the Normans conquest, and had been finally totally conquered by that nasty Longshanks chap (you know - the mean old king in braveheart) by the 1280's.
Now, we could retrospectively redesign our flag to include Wales (wouldn't a big dragon on the front look cool?) - but surely then we should also represent previously independent kingdoms like Northumbria (red and yellow stripes), Mercia (chuck in a yellow cross), Wessex (another dragon) and, god forbid, Essex (swords!)?
Now that would be a flag!
In reply to parkovski:
Amusing that people can comment on the correct use of GB or UK and at the same time refer incorrectly to the 'Union Jack'
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker)
> [...]
>
> It's not that there has been some mysterious reason to omit a welsh element to the Union Flag, it's simply that there was never a historical reason to include it.
>
At last, someone has corrected the use of Union Jack to Union Flag.> [...]
>
> It's not that there has been some mysterious reason to omit a welsh element to the Union Flag, it's simply that there was never a historical reason to include it.
>
Amusing that people can comment on the correct use of GB or UK and at the same time refer incorrectly to the 'Union Jack'
In reply to MG:
Regardless of whether the powers at be consider it acceptable to refer to our flag as a jack, a jack is still the term applied to any bow mounted flag. For the sake of clarity, and as an anti-pedant measure* "Union Flag" is still better (if not wrong).
I too find it baffling that so many people who live on it don't know what Great Britain is!
Regardless of whether the powers at be consider it acceptable to refer to our flag as a jack, a jack is still the term applied to any bow mounted flag. For the sake of clarity, and as an anti-pedant measure* "Union Flag" is still better (if not wrong).
I too find it baffling that so many people who live on it don't know what Great Britain is!
In reply to MG:
I've just followed through on the flag institute stuff and, as summarised in the wiki article, it seems the Admirality stance in 1902 and a Parlimentary quote are the main justification for "Union Jack" being acceptable sensu lato. This raises the following points:
1) Is it the responsibility of the Admirality to dictate flag based nomenclature beyond things naval?
2) Does a quote (or misquote) of the common usage of the term Union Jack from a minister* represent a shift in the government/crown's position on the matter?
3) Does George III (as monarch) take precedence on national flag terminology?
4) Does the fact that the crown/government has made no attempt since George III to offer any specific edict on what we should call this piece of cloth in different circumstances represent official indifference?
5) Should anyone care?
6) When someone says "Union Jack" (sensu lato) do we understand what they mean, and if we try to correct it to "Union Flag", what level of pedantry are we employing?
*come on - it's not like they're known for knowing what they're talking about!
I've just followed through on the flag institute stuff and, as summarised in the wiki article, it seems the Admirality stance in 1902 and a Parlimentary quote are the main justification for "Union Jack" being acceptable sensu lato. This raises the following points:
1) Is it the responsibility of the Admirality to dictate flag based nomenclature beyond things naval?
2) Does a quote (or misquote) of the common usage of the term Union Jack from a minister* represent a shift in the government/crown's position on the matter?
3) Does George III (as monarch) take precedence on national flag terminology?
4) Does the fact that the crown/government has made no attempt since George III to offer any specific edict on what we should call this piece of cloth in different circumstances represent official indifference?
5) Should anyone care?
6) When someone says "Union Jack" (sensu lato) do we understand what they mean, and if we try to correct it to "Union Flag", what level of pedantry are we employing?
*come on - it's not like they're known for knowing what they're talking about!
In reply to RCJ:
That's piffle, no one ever said this till wikipedia came along - we all called the British flag the Union Jack, and most still will... except pedantical googlers, that is.
> Firstly its the Union Flag, not Union Jack. Its only a Union Jack when on a jackstaff of a British Warship.
That's piffle, no one ever said this till wikipedia came along - we all called the British flag the Union Jack, and most still will... except pedantical googlers, that is.
In reply to steelbru:
The debacle over the home football associations and the GB football teams, shows that the term United Kingdom would be totally inappropriate.
Anyway isn't all this a bit sexist. We have a Queen, shouldn't it be a Queendom.
The debacle over the home football associations and the GB football teams, shows that the term United Kingdom would be totally inappropriate.
Anyway isn't all this a bit sexist. We have a Queen, shouldn't it be a Queendom.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Piffle Bruce, pedants have been correcting people on this since before Tim Berners-Lee, Jimmy Wales, Sergey Brin and Larry Page were born.
> (In reply to RCJ)
>
> [...]
>
> That's piffle, no one ever said this till wikipedia came along - we all called the British flag the Union Jack, and most still will... except pedantical googlers, that is.
>
> [...]
>
> That's piffle, no one ever said this till wikipedia came along - we all called the British flag the Union Jack, and most still will... except pedantical googlers, that is.
Piffle Bruce, pedants have been correcting people on this since before Tim Berners-Lee, Jimmy Wales, Sergey Brin and Larry Page were born.
In reply to parkovski:
Personally I think the term Union Jack for all usage is way preferable to Union Flag (which sounds as though it has far too many Orange sympathiser leanings). Union Jack is just a better name and shows far more imagination than 'Tricolour' or 'Stars and Stripes'
Personally I think the term Union Jack for all usage is way preferable to Union Flag (which sounds as though it has far too many Orange sympathiser leanings). Union Jack is just a better name and shows far more imagination than 'Tricolour' or 'Stars and Stripes'
In reply to ashley1_scott:
All quite confusing, especially for sports fans to grasp... I still prefer my terminology - "The United Republican Democracy" team would give us "Team TURD" which has a splendid, sophisticated ring to it, quite in keeping with the Olympic spirit.
> To change the letters would involve a new 'country' to be formed as was in Germany's case GER, from East Germany GDR and West Germany FRG.
All quite confusing, especially for sports fans to grasp... I still prefer my terminology - "The United Republican Democracy" team would give us "Team TURD" which has a splendid, sophisticated ring to it, quite in keeping with the Olympic spirit.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Sorry Bruce, not a googlers invention - I remember my dad having a good old debate about this with the barman aboard HMS Victory back in the late 1980s, and my granddad used to correct me on it too. However, if by "piffle" you mean "something that really has no official standpoint, and is so unimportant as to render debate laughable" - I'll give you that!
The facts of the case:
1) "Jack" to describe a small flag flown from the small mast mounted on the bowsprit, predates the James I's reign (and original union flag).
2) Jack refers to any flag flown in this position, but not generally to a flag flown out of this position. See usage of term "jacksprit" for ships without a bowsprit from Victorian times onward.
3) A royal proclamation by George III specifically distinguishes "Ensigns, Jacks, Flags, and Pendants" with reference to what can and cannot be flown by merchant ships, and refers specifically to the Union Jack in this context. However the flag in the corner of the red ensign is referred to as the "Union Jack", but it also refers to the red ensign as a "red jack" suggesting this flag was meant to be displayed as a jack... Or that they were as confused as everyone else.
4) The UK's national flag is based on common custom not statute, and what it should be called has no definitive reference.
5) "Union Jack" has been in common usage to refer to the flag in all situations, and such usage has not resulted in objection within parliament and the admiralty.
6) The Flag Institute don't mind which you call it, all though they do mind very much if you fail to observe correct etiquette when flying it.
In short, just about everyone calls it the Union Jack and this is fine... Union Flag, British Flag or Flag of the UK are all similarly acceptable. The fact that we (including flag geeks) have accepted an ambiguous use of the term Jack shows how much anyone should care about what you call it!
http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/15329/pages/84
http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=7.2
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1908/jul/14/the-flying-of-the-unio...
> (In reply to RCJ)
>
> [...]
>
> That's piffle, no one ever said this till wikipedia came along - we all called the British flag the Union Jack, and most still will... except pedantical googlers, that is.
>
> [...]
>
> That's piffle, no one ever said this till wikipedia came along - we all called the British flag the Union Jack, and most still will... except pedantical googlers, that is.
Sorry Bruce, not a googlers invention - I remember my dad having a good old debate about this with the barman aboard HMS Victory back in the late 1980s, and my granddad used to correct me on it too. However, if by "piffle" you mean "something that really has no official standpoint, and is so unimportant as to render debate laughable" - I'll give you that!
The facts of the case:
1) "Jack" to describe a small flag flown from the small mast mounted on the bowsprit, predates the James I's reign (and original union flag).
2) Jack refers to any flag flown in this position, but not generally to a flag flown out of this position. See usage of term "jacksprit" for ships without a bowsprit from Victorian times onward.
3) A royal proclamation by George III specifically distinguishes "Ensigns, Jacks, Flags, and Pendants" with reference to what can and cannot be flown by merchant ships, and refers specifically to the Union Jack in this context. However the flag in the corner of the red ensign is referred to as the "Union Jack", but it also refers to the red ensign as a "red jack" suggesting this flag was meant to be displayed as a jack... Or that they were as confused as everyone else.
4) The UK's national flag is based on common custom not statute, and what it should be called has no definitive reference.
5) "Union Jack" has been in common usage to refer to the flag in all situations, and such usage has not resulted in objection within parliament and the admiralty.
6) The Flag Institute don't mind which you call it, all though they do mind very much if you fail to observe correct etiquette when flying it.
In short, just about everyone calls it the Union Jack and this is fine... Union Flag, British Flag or Flag of the UK are all similarly acceptable. The fact that we (including flag geeks) have accepted an ambiguous use of the term Jack shows how much anyone should care about what you call it!
http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/15329/pages/84
http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=7.2
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1908/jul/14/the-flying-of-the-unio...
In reply to GrahamD:
>Union Jack is just a better name and shows far more imagination than 'Tricolour' or 'Stars and Stripes'
It shows no imagination whatsoever. It shows the routes of mild linguistic aberration, and shifts in common usage over several hundred years. The term, at it's inception, referred to a jack flag representing the union - Union Jack is less imaginative than "Jazzy King Flapper".
The reason none of these things show no imagination is because they are just words which refer to objects, sentimentality is attached later when the blood they were born from dries.
> (In reply to parkovski)
>Union Jack is just a better name and shows far more imagination than 'Tricolour' or 'Stars and Stripes'
It shows no imagination whatsoever. It shows the routes of mild linguistic aberration, and shifts in common usage over several hundred years. The term, at it's inception, referred to a jack flag representing the union - Union Jack is less imaginative than "Jazzy King Flapper".
The reason none of these things show no imagination is because they are just words which refer to objects, sentimentality is attached later when the blood they were born from dries.
In reply to The New NickB:
No good - then we'd have to keep swithching between King- and Queendom...
What about Monarchozone or Regublic or Royaliate?
No good - then we'd have to keep swithching between King- and Queendom...
What about Monarchozone or Regublic or Royaliate?
In reply to parkovski:
It shows imagination because it sounds right - its more poetic than 'union flag' or 'flag with red and white crosses on it' - to follow the French or American naming convention.
It shows imagination because it sounds right - its more poetic than 'union flag' or 'flag with red and white crosses on it' - to follow the French or American naming convention.
In reply to parkovski:
There is no reason why a 'kingdom' cannot have a 'queen', just as 'mankind' encompasses men and women
There is no reason why a 'kingdom' cannot have a 'queen', just as 'mankind' encompasses men and women
In reply to GrahamD:
We must have different understandings of what constitutes imagination. I would not consider 'clipstick', 'doorbell', 'car park' or 'running shoe' imaginative. These have exactly the same route of etymological genesis as 'union jack' (i.e. compounds of preexisting terms to refer to a new thing). I would in fact argue that it's a lack of imagination which has led to it's use - literally nobody important through history has cared enough to stop and think "what should we call this thing?"
I'm not arguing that it doesn't sound nicer, I'm just engaging in pedantry (which is after all very much on-topic).
btw - with reference to your response to the kingdom/queendom thing - do you really think either of us are serious?! If you don't keep a tongue in your cheek about such things you'll find a humourless person with a viewpoint opposed to you and we will have to remove all gender from our language. So please, assume everything you read is a joke.... especially words like 'Regublic'.
We must have different understandings of what constitutes imagination. I would not consider 'clipstick', 'doorbell', 'car park' or 'running shoe' imaginative. These have exactly the same route of etymological genesis as 'union jack' (i.e. compounds of preexisting terms to refer to a new thing). I would in fact argue that it's a lack of imagination which has led to it's use - literally nobody important through history has cared enough to stop and think "what should we call this thing?"
I'm not arguing that it doesn't sound nicer, I'm just engaging in pedantry (which is after all very much on-topic).
btw - with reference to your response to the kingdom/queendom thing - do you really think either of us are serious?! If you don't keep a tongue in your cheek about such things you'll find a humourless person with a viewpoint opposed to you and we will have to remove all gender from our language. So please, assume everything you read is a joke.... especially words like 'Regublic'.
In reply to GrahamD:
PS - "It shows imagination because it sounds right"... Again, I'm not disagreeing with your preference, but is there not a possibility that you are biased by your conventions and experiences? After all, the whole reason people argue about this is that to the impassioned few who know what a jacksprit's for - it "sounds wrong".
Be careful dealing in absolutes at which a nit might pick!
> (In reply to parkovski)
PS - "It shows imagination because it sounds right"... Again, I'm not disagreeing with your preference, but is there not a possibility that you are biased by your conventions and experiences? After all, the whole reason people argue about this is that to the impassioned few who know what a jacksprit's for - it "sounds wrong".
Be careful dealing in absolutes at which a nit might pick!
In reply to GrahamD:
tip top!
> (In reply to parkovski)
>
> All comments taken (and made) with the requisite large pinch of salt
>
> All comments taken (and made) with the requisite large pinch of salt
tip top!
In reply to john arran:
They couldn't have a "Team F*CK" though, could they? It would proably be illegal in many countries... mind you it would be more entertaining than curling.
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker)
>
> I think my silly acronym trumps yours!
>
> I think my silly acronym trumps yours!
They couldn't have a "Team F*CK" though, could they? It would proably be illegal in many countries... mind you it would be more entertaining than curling.
In reply to steelbru: http://www.know-britain.com/general/great_britain.html Just to add even more similar-sounding terms into the mix...
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...