Language desk
< April 26	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 28 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 27

Telling time in "The Browning Version"

Hello, friends. Yesterday I was utubularly renewing my acquaintance with the 1951 film of Terence Rattigan's The Browning Version.

At one point, Crocker-Harris told a student the time, and used an expression I'd not noticed before:

It lacks nine and a half minutes of eleven.

Crocker-Harris's hallmarks were his precise and correct language and, at least as played by Michael Redgrave, his studied and correct enunciation of every word. So, this expression came through loud and clear, and I assume Rattigan chose his character to speak it because it was the "correct" way to tell the time. I'd like to know more about it. Was this indeed the norm back then (the play was written in 1948) for schoolmasters or more widely throughout academia or the educated classes? When did it drop from use? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:26, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although I've seen the film, I don't recall that phrase; however I don't remember anybody (schoolteacher or otherwise) using that expression in London (but then I didn't have an expensive private education). Alansplodge (talk) 22:54, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's at 16.35 here. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 02:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In context it seems like he's not merely telling time (he's not answering the question "What time is it?"), he's pointing out how much time is remaining for the exam, so he's really saying, "You have nine and a half minutes until eleven". I also wonder whether this or a similar expression is the origin of the American phrase "quarter of eleven" which seems to cause much bewilderment in visitors from other English-speaking countries who are accustomed only to "quarter to eleven". Angr (talk) 08:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And no wonder it causes bewilderment, Angr. Is there any other usage of "of" that means "before, or prior to"? I can't think of a single one. "A quarter short of eleven" makes sense , but "short of" is never abbreviated to just "of" (The plane crashed when it landed of the runway - no, I don't think so). Until I was put right, I thought "A quarter of eleven" was a sort of olde-folksy way of saying "a quarter of an hour into the eleventh hour" = 10:15. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I await confirmation of this, but I suspect this started out as "a quarter off eleven", then the "off" was eroded into "of". And now people say it because it's become the idiom, not because it makes any sense per se. Just like "I could care less", when they mean the exact opposite. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 13:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Jack, for that matter, is there any other usage of "to" that means "before" or "prior to"? I can't think of one either. It's interesting that what you formerly thought "quarter to eleven" meant is precisely what "viertel elf" (literally "quarter eleven") means in German. Angr (talk) 10:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See the etymology of "of" and the etymology of "off".

—Wavelength (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Crocker-Harris was a classics master, so perhaps he was here using an over- literal rendering of a bit of Latin or Greek syntax. Just to keep the pupils on their toes. Sussexonian (talk) 13:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is how I'd interpret it, as well, although the Classical world didn't usually express time with a resolution finer than the hour. Tevildo (talk) 14:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know anything about Latin time-telling conventions, but duodeviginti ("two off of twenty") and undeviginti ("one off of twenty") were reasonably common ways of saying "eighteen" and "nineteen"... AnonMoos (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Roman calendar and Today's date in Latin.

—Wavelength (talk) 01:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jack, "it is/was X minutes of (the hour)" and "wants [or lacks] X minutes of (the hour)" were quite common 19th century ways of expressing the time. See here and here. The schoolmaster is simply showing his preference for an old-fashioned (in 1948) way of speaking, still perfectly correct to his mind, methinks. Actually, I kind of like it myself. Textorus (talk) 05:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, lovely. Thanks, Textorus. That Rattigan sure did his homework. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Textorus (talk) 08:31, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved