Guide Politeness strategies in Hungary and England with special focus on greetings and leave-taking terms

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Politeness strategies in Hungary and England with special focus on greetings and leave-taking terms file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Politeness strategies in Hungary and England with special focus on greetings and leave-taking terms book. Happy reading Politeness strategies in Hungary and England with special focus on greetings and leave-taking terms Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Politeness strategies in Hungary and England with special focus on greetings and leave-taking terms at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Politeness strategies in Hungary and England with special focus on greetings and leave-taking terms Pocket Guide.

The gesture foreshadows the up-thendown movement of the Ferris-wheel, where Holly and the undead Harry, who had staged the accident so as to fool the police, come face to face. Eventually, the action will go underground in a literal sense. One invokes the thrills of claustrophobia, the other the thrills of vertigo. The constants and variables of this trope, as used by Hugo and followed by Greene, need not concern us too closely here, but the thematic filiation does alert us to the fact that there is, in fact, a fairly long-standing narrative presence in European and American literature of the modern city sewage systems are par excellence a feature of urban modernity and at the same time an image of the dirty underside of things that have been pushed out of sight in civic society 5 as a Forest Perilous, or jungle.

Alexandre Dumas picked up the parallel between inner city and savage wilderness in his novel Les Mohicans de Paris ; the slang name apache for a Parisian underworld criminal likewise plays on the connection. In each case, the back alleys of the great cities are a dangerous testing ground for the hero, who here proves his mettle and his superiority.

The detective in this kind of story must be such a man. He is the hero, he is everything. Chandler — One year before Casablanca, the triad of Bogart, Lorre, and Greenstreet had acted out scenes of crime, betrayal, and willpower in The Maltese Falcon , based on a Dashiel Hammett story and a remake of a version, with Bogart playing Sam Spade. Lost in the labyrinth: Confused pioneers In the decades following the First World War, Europe seemed to present a happy, adventurous challenge to Americans.

The heroic progress of the allied forces from the Normandy landings onwards was to reinforce the idea of an American can-do attitude in a European setting, men of honour going down mean streets. It is this source tradition that is ruthlessly ironized and subverted in The Third Man. Accordingly, his notion of good and evil in Vienna is simplistic to a degree. Calloway rejoins:6 6. Calloway is the closest we get to an authorial point of view and moral anchoring point in The Third Man.

In the story Greene subsequently wrote, Calloway provides the narrative voice,. Calloway: That sounds like a cheap novelette. Holly: I write cheap novelettes. Holly: Holly Martins. Holly: Death at Double-X Ranch? Holly: Listen Calahan Calloway: Calloway. Sounds like one of your stories. In the event, it emerges that good and evil, perpetrator and victim, friend and foe, are hopelessly tangled. The Third Man mysteriously present after the drive-by accident of Harry Lime was Harry Lime himself, staging his own death. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love and five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce?

The cuckoo clock! So long, Holly. This cynical dissociation and opposition between civilization and morality, between the good and the beautiful, is what wrong-foots Holly throughout the film. The hero is out of his depth, and the setting is accordingly full of oblique angles, distorted perspectives, buildings surrounded by scaffolds and rubble. The morality and the topography of Vienna are both equally askew. What is more, this labyrinthine morality reverberates in a strong European—American polarity. The idea of Vienna-as-pitfall is enhanced by the cultural incomprehensibility and complexity of the place.

As often as not, they speak a strange language. A surprisingly large amount of dialogue in the film is in fact in German and, as such, incomprehensible to the questing Holly. Holly: Speak English? Janitor shrugs and smiles apologetically : English? The incomprehensibility of Vienna is thus not only a moral one but also a cultural one. Conclusions From all these conflict-fraught tales of disturbance, we can extrapolate an underlying sense of normality — the implied European default of normality against which the disturbance manifests itself.

I would suggest it in the following terms: The implicit European self-image is one of a separation between an ordered interior world, ruled by laws and by domestic values, a household with a centre of gravity in traditional authority, and cordoned off from an unordered outside where only the law of the jungle applies. That image is that of the house, with its roofs, walls, and thresholds separating outside from inside and with its central focus in the hearth and chimney giving warmth and shelter to its inhabitants.

Outside this ordered world of domesticity are nomads, displaced or placeless strangers, who live in non-houses, whose fires are not on a hearth but under the open skies, and whose behaviour is wild, lawless, unregulated, and transgressive. The cities of non-Europe are, accordingly, not places of law and order but urban jungles of crime and lawlessness from the casbahs of the Islamic world to the criminal ganglands of the Americas.

Seen in this light, the crisis of European order as experienced around the ravages of the Second World War are exemplified by the idea that this nomadic, anti-domestic Otherness is no longer outside but inside Europe: in the chaotic, ruined cities with their displaced people and black markets. Vienna is as much a casbah as Casablanca or Algiers, and the topology is that of the non-domestic building, the non-house: a place of walls but without inside or outside, and with, at its hearts, not a hearth but a monster; the prototype being the Labyrinth.

Postwar Europe is, a bit in moral and in topological terms, a maze.


Behind the home and the rule of order is the shadow of the non-home, unheimlichkeit. Europe presents, in modern representations, a combination of civilized refinement and a fraught history, a combination of suave civility and long-lost innocence, that Machiavellian sense that behind every Michelangelo lurks a Borgia, behind every Sissi a Dracula, behind every Louvre a Dachau — and between the two a sense of complexity and mixed feelings.

References Alloway, Lawrence. World Review 57— Asbury, Herbert New York: Garden City.

  • Terms for varieties of English.
  • Essentials of Human Anatomy and Physiology: Urinary System.
  • 1. Greetings and leave-taking terms.
  • Brexit is not the will of the British people – it never has been | LSE BREXIT.
  • Utilitarianism in Victorian England (with a special emphasis on Bentham and Mill)!
  • Leave A Comment!
  • Account Options?

Beller, Manfred—Leerssen, Joep, eds. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Billington, Ray Allen. New York: Norton. Bowman, James. Honor: A History. New York: Encounter. Campbell, John Kennedy. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Paris: Boivin. Chandler, Raymond. The Simple Art of Murder. In The Chandler Collection, vol. London: Picador. Chew, William L. III, ed. Dumas, Alexandre. Le Comte de Monte-Cristo. Jacques-Henry Bornecque ed. Paris: Garnier. Dyserinck, Hugo. Komparatistische Hefte 1: 31— Elke Mehnert.

Berlin: Frank und Timme. Fabian, Johannes. New York: Columbia University Press. Florack, Ruth. Stuttgart: Metzler Verlag. Vraisemblance et motivation.

Philologica Vol. 9, No. 2, by Acta Universitatis Sapientiae - Issuu

In Figures II. Essais, 71— Paris: Seuil. Gilmore, David G. Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean. Washington, D. Greene, Graham. London: Vintage Press. Harmetz, Aljean. New York: Hyperion. Hoppenbrouwers, Peter. Medieval History Journal 9 2 : — Kleinlogel, Cornelia. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Konstantinou, Evangelos, ed.

Konstantinovic, Zoran. Zur Kontamination ihrer Epitheta. In Franz K. Jahrhunderts, — Heidelberg: Winter Verlag. Leerssen, Joep. Remembrance and Imagination. Cork: Cork University Press. Barfoot ed. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Spiegelpaleis Europa. Nijmegen: Vantilt. Marshall, P. Asia and the Progress of Civil Society. London: Dent. Palmer, James W. Peristiany, Jean G. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ruland, Richard. Shaw, Francis. The Celtic Twilight. Studies 25—41, — Schiffer, Reinhold. Bochum: Studienverlag N. Der Charakter des Pferdes. Viareggio: Barone. Stajnova, Mihaila—Zaimova, Raia. Etudes balkaniques 3: 95— Steins, Martin. Ein Beitrag zur literarischen Imagologie. Frankfurt: Thesen Verlag. Woodward, C. New York: Oxford University Press. Wright, Will—Steven Kaplan, eds. Zacharasiewicz, Waldemar. Transatlantische Differenzen in kulturhistorischer Perspektive.

The confrontation between the native and the foreign is a problem that focuses research efforts on a number of humanities, e. The following report analyses the notion of the foreign, the other, the different, reflected in the phraseological wealth of the Hungarian and Bulgarian languages. The reviewed phrasemes concentrate the shock upon collision with the different or evaluation of the experience gained in the continuous communication with the other.

The foreign is usually individualized by outlining and exaggerating some of its characteristics using parallels, oppositions, and metaphors. Many of the idioms reflect interethnic relations from times long gone, and so they are no longer a significant part of the active vocabulary of Hungarians and Bulgarians. Their analysis, however, is of great interest as they preserve the collective memory of the Hungarian and Bulgarian cultural communities and reveal their traditional notions and knowledge.

Keywords: contrastive phraseology, phrasemes, national stereotypes, ethnonyms. It is a well-known fact that a significant part of the cultural memory of every language community is encoded in its phraseology. The idioms refer to the realia of the given culture, carry significant ethno-cultural information, and have various connotations. The purpose of the present article is to examine in the light of phraseology what images are present and passed on about strangers in the public consciousness of Hungarians and Bulgarians.

Strangers are interesting because they differ from the rest in terms of language, culture, and mentality. They express the shock caused by the first collision with otherness or the evaluation of experiences accumulated through being in touch with strangers for a long time. The words used to name gypsies in Bulgarian have negative overtones, e. It has to be noted, however, that an ethic name cannot, in itself, be offensive or endearing, pretty or ugly. Different ethnonyms are used in different situations and contexts, and not only as denominations but as qualifications as well.

Certain social, not linguistic processes determine the usage of a particular word. As time goes by, the names of certain nations or social groups go through semantic changes. They are given positive or negative connotations and thus become tools for stereotyping. The identity of a national group is born and shaped through connections and frictions with other groups and neighbours. Hungarians and Bulgarians sometimes view certain national groups similarly, which proves the universal nature of characteristics.

The translations from Hungarian and Bulgarian specialist literature are my own throughout the article. In Bulgarian phraseology, it is mainly the Turks, the Greeks, the Gypsies, the Vlachs, the Albanians, and the Jews that are the targets of prejudicial thinking, innocent mockery, and degrading or derisive humour.

Some other ethnicities living in neighbouring countries are excluded from this circle. Nagy list in their comprehensive collections of Hungarian sayings and proverbs any expressions about Croatians or Ukrainians Rusyns. It is to be noted that a certain portion of the phrasemes containing national denotations have faded historically and become obsolete. For this reason, beliefs and judgments regarding certain nations and ethnic groups cannot be absolutized for today.

Since they are solidified in. The Hungarian national self-image is very diverse and sometimes even contradictory. This approach is completely different from that of other nations. Comparing the phrasemes of two structurally very diverse languages made it possible to demonstrate certain universal semantic characteristics of the foreign and the difference in their linguistic manifestations. Besides its practical functions, foreign language learning also provides a linguistic prerequisite for broadening our knowledge: it modifies the primary model of the world created by our native tongue and provides new perspectives for us by showing different ways to learn about people and the world in general.

The attitude towards the foreign coded in Hungarian and Bulgarian phraseological units is of an emotional and judging nature. It expresses distrust for the unknown and also a subjective conviction that when compared to others, the own is superior. Today, when unified Europe is like an organization consisting of many nations, encountering otherness other people, objects, flavours, and so on is an everyday occurrence.

Throughout history — and especially in recent years, due to the refugee crisis — we, Europeans having complex and rich identities , have gained a significant amount of experience about how harmful and destructive the growth of intolerance, the policy of not accepting otherness, extreme national pride and aggressive patriotism can be; of how much damage can be caused by artificially induced debates about the foreign and by the hidden, smouldering tension.

Attempts to violate ethnic or religious identity or to promote covert or aggressive ethnic cleansing will lead nowhere. They are destructive, shortsighted, and irrational political acts that not only prevent every chance of integration but also turn loyal citizens into terrorists, secular personalities into religious fanatics, and humane people into barbarians. They make enemies out of people who have been living together in peace for centuries, lessening the efficiency of social cooperation and condemning certain states and nations to dependency, stagnation, and poverty.

It is obvious that the principles of equality, partnership, and mutual respect have to be followed for the sake of the common good, and otherness has to be accepted without judgment and prejudice. The more we know about other cultures and people representing them, the less conflict we will have to be confronted with.

Magyar Nyelv 97 3 : — Margalits, Ede. Pusztai, Ferenc, ed. Idiom Dictionary of the Bulgarian Language]. Dictionary of Bulgarian Slang]. Bulgarian Sayings and Proverbs]. Bulgarian Explanatory Dictionary]. Bulgarian Parables or Proverbs and Characteristic Words]. The acquisition of linguo-cultural competence in foreign language learning has its share in the overall process of acquiring the language. In the inter-language contact situation, the speaker has to overcome not only the language but also the cultural barrier.

The present paper examines the acquisition of greetings by Hungarian native speakers in the process of learning Bulgarian language, as a result of acquiring linguo-cultural competence. The question of the nation-specific aspect of the communicative act carries an important role in foreign language acquisition, undoubtedly due to the fact that it reveals language-specific features. Keywords: communicative grammar, socio-pragmatics language acquisition, speech act greeting.

Introductory lines One route to successful communication is language competence — this is a well-known fact. Within the large field of language acquisition and mastering of lexemes and grammar structures, there is a rather interesting aspect, namely, pragmatic competence.

The interaction between native and foreign pragmatic competence in the process of various communicative acts has been attracting the attention of researchers over the past decades with an ongoing vitality. We are all aware that the implementation of speech acts plays an important role in inter-language contacts. Undoubtedly, the question of the nation-specific.

Therefore, whenever a foreign language has been taught or learnt, the differences in the verbal means of communication of different peoples should be taken into account. The aim of the present investigation is to compare a communicative act in two different languages, as manifested in the process of language acquisition and demonstrated as pragmatic competence in written translations of Bulgarian into Hungarian.

The etiquette segment of speech on which the current research focuses is the act of greeting. Theoretical considerations There have been published laborious works on greetings in both languages among others: Tzankov , Lengyel , etc. However, a cross-linguistic interpretation of this act is rather hard to find cf.

Banova — Due to restricted space, the object in mind of the present paper will not be elaborated on the literature. In turn, the attention is focused on the concrete language data and its analysis. It is worth pointing out that the preliminary observations indicate morphological and socio-pragmatic asymmetry between Bulgarian and Hungarian. In contrast with Bulgarian, in Hungarian, politeness is expressed with specific pronominal forms, both in the singular and in the plural e.

Right from this starting point, it is expected that Hungarian will have a larger diversity of forms, and, as Lengyel — points out, there are twenty etiquette forms of greetings which are commonly used in the language. From a socio-pragmatic perspective, the opposition familiar—stranger is relevant for Bulgarian since this is one of the conditions for using the polite form, whereas for Hungarian the opposition young—old has to be taken into account as well.

Furthermore, for the performing of the speech act of greeting in Hungarian, one should also consider the gender of the interlocutors, an irrelevant factor for Bulgarian. Altogether, the preference of. In the course of investigation, I will consider the following base factors on further factors, cf. Language data: the experiment 2. Participants Seven Hungarian native speakers took part in the linguistic experiment: four male and three female subjects. All of them were students, studying Bulgarian philology at the University of Szeged, Hungary. The level of Bulgarian language knowledge was upper-intermediate to advanced.

The age of the participants varied between 20 and 26 years. Procedure For the needs of the current investigation, an experiment was carried out: the subjects had to translate nine pre-selected micro-dialogues from Bulgarian into Hungarian. As the participants received the printed Bulgarian-language microdialogues, they were told that they were taking part in a language experiment, a sociolinguistic comparison of the speech act of greeting in Bulgarian and Hungarian. All students were encouraged to be maximally adequate to the greeting situations in Hungarian society while carrying out the written translations.

In order to avoid misunderstandings, all micro-dialogues were verbally discussed in regards to the specific situation in which they occurred. Micro-dialogues: communicative frames The micro-dialogues were excerpted from textbooks of Bulgarian language for foreigners Antonova et al. The selection of the microdialogues was governed by the fact that they should contain certain grammatical rules, on the one hand, and represent various communicative situations, on the other hand.

All micro-dialogues are part of larger dialogues. Each participant of the experiment was given nine micro-dialogues. The sociolinguistic parameters. In the first dialogue, two students — strangers to each other — greet each other. They all know each other. How are you? How are you-SG? What a nice meeting! She studies medicine. Are you coming from lectures? In the fifth micro-dialogue, two friends greet each other. Who was that girl? There is no information concerning their age.

You are also at the movies? Are you alone? And you? The politeness is explicitly expressed in the verb form. One of the participants is a woman. In the language data from the experimental texts, we find the following communicative situations: the interlocutors are young strangers, young distant acquaintances, young colleagues and friends, young and elderly acquaintances, young strangers, and elderly distant acquaintances. As seen from the sociolinguistic parameters of the nine micro-dialogues, the excerpted material does not exhaust all possible communicative situations a rather difficult task in itself, given the large variation in the socio-factors.

For example, there are no examples of greeting acts between elder colleagues, between a boss and an employee, between an adult and a child, etc. Such further extension of this interesting aspect of communicative acquisition would be in the focus of another, following work. Description of the results The nine micro-dialogues generated 32 translation equivalents in Hungarian cf. In order to juxtapose the Bulgarian—Hungarian realizations of the speech act greeting, some informants were also invited to verify the results, as they were presented in a comparative form linguistic situation by linguistic situation i.

The need of informants was also provoked by the fact that there are hardly any comparative works dealing with speech act equivalents between Bulgarian and Hungarian, and some translation solutions call for further consideration. The polite form is substituted with the informal second person singular. The polite form of the source text is translated into Hungarian with the informal second person singular form. The polite verb form was used by all participants. Discussion and analysis of the results The analysis of the data from the language experiment, more exactly the translation of micro-dialogues containing greeting forms from Bulgarian into Hungarian, points out the fact that the choice of translation equivalents in Hungarian is governed rather by the sociolinguistic and the pragmatic factors defining the idiosyncrasy of the target language, and not as much by the text of the source language.

The strategy of the participants is explained by their attempt to adapt the etiquette formulas of greeting to the Hungarian language in the socio-pragmatic frame of the speech act in question. Had the participants chosen to perform an isomorphic translation, they would have probably ended up with a non-natural dialogue and a twisted communicative situation. The translation solutions found in micro-dialogues 8 and 9 reveal a common point in the two languages: the polite forms are preferred when there are elderly and slightly acquainted people among the interlocutors.

Micro-dialogue 2 shows a different picture from 8 and 9, although the communicative situation is similar. Four participants used the second person form i. This clearly shows and allows us to point out that the Hungarian language has a richer palette of greeting forms, both in formal and informal contexts. The results reveal that in the cases when the interlocutors are young strangers or distant acquaintances , the majority of the participants in the experiment chose a greeting required by the particular communicative situation for the Hungarian language e.

The language data shows that in the perception of Hungarian speakers these two forms do not have any gradation on the formality scale. We suppose that this is due to the incorrect acquisition of language material. There is only one participant who chose this particular form. Informants were asked to give additional clarification regarding this specific communicative solution in the translation.

One of the informants offered the explanation that if a female interlocutor holds a higher position in the hierarchy i. This could be a result of language transfer given the source language form , on the one hand, or it could also be attributed to a certain tendency in the colloquial Hungarian, on the other hand. However, at this stage, it is not possible to give a unanimous answer to this issue.

Conclusions The results obtained from the translation of etiquette formulas, i. There is a clear indication that the nation-specific differences in communicative situations in the two languages are taken into account and the language-specific that is, also nation-specific realizations are an important factor in language transfer. The thesis that politeness is governed by different requirements in the two languages is confirmed by the data. In Bulgarian, the degree of acquaintance factor is relevant, that is, it carries a crucial role, whereas in Hungarian the age factor is higher in the politeness hierarchy, while the degree of acquaintance factor is not relevant when the interlocutors are young people.

An expected similarity in the use of second person singular non-polite forms expressing informal communicative environment is also observed when the interlocutors know each other they are friends, colleagues, etc. The demonstrated differences in morphological aspect do not influence the adequacy of the translations. References Antonova, J, E. Kiryakova, T. Bulgaria and the Bulgarians]. Sofia: Nauka i izkustvo. Banova, Savelina.

Sofia: Iztok-Zapad. Ilieva-Baltova, Penka. Lengyel, Zsolt. Moscow: Nauka. Levinson, S. Markkanen, Raija. Papp, Ferenc. Moscow: Progress. Petrova, Stefka, ed. Sofia: Ivan Bogorov. Semantics vs Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tzankov, K. Sofia: Narodna Prosveta. Appendix 1. Hogy vagytok? Te hogy vagy? Hogy vagy? The Acquisition of the Communicative Act of Greeting Hogy van? Te is moziba? The work examines the most recent English borrowings in Hungarian, and it focuses on their morphophonological integration.

By analysing the re-adjustment if any that they undergo in order to fit in the phonotactic requirements of Hungarian, it is revealed that the language employs a specific adaptation strategy. The aim is to show that by not obeying certain phonological laws in the process of perception and adapting the newly arrived loanwords, in fact, Hungarian demonstrates a tendency to mark these lexical items as foreign. Keywords: loanword adaptation, Hungarian, phonology. The process of adaptation, inevitably governed by the system of the receiving language, triggers off language-specific strategies for supplementing the new loan with all the necessary equipment for functioning in the language.

Evidence for the realization of harmonic or disharmonic processes in the words is found by examining a specific layer of the Hungarian lexicon — recent English loans. It is expected that in the course of reception of foreign words into. Hungarian, as a Finno-Ugric language with a finely developed harmonizing system, offers an appropriate framework. The data have been excerpted from etymological dictionaries and specialized literature, but due to the idiosyncrasy of the examined material, the main sources are web-based forums and life-style magazines.

A general agreement is that loanwords often violate the vowel harmony observed by native roots, especially as far as the inner-root vowel configuration is concerned. Anti-harmonic parameters The phonological phenomenon known as anti-harmony is usually realized at morpheme boundary. While the combining of front and back vowels within the stem is treated as non-harmonic cf. Anti-harmony in Hungarian is registered at certain types of stems as well as at a group of words which belong to a specific lexical stratum.

This restricted number of realizations is reviewed in the academic grammars of the Hungarian language, and it is usually referred to as an exception rather than an infringement of the phonological law for harmonizing. For more details regarding the language data, please cf. Vishogradska and Banova The conclusion which could be drawn upon these data is that apart from the roots themselves it is possible that the suffixes are also characterized by certain ambiguity.

The exact constraints which determine the manifestation of ambiguity obviously vary; however, it is not impossible to trace them which is an interesting matter requiring exhaustive investigation and is not part of the current interest. Linguistic data: manifestations of an adaptation strategy Apart from the well-known group of anti-harmonic roots cf. However, their morphosyntactic presence in Hungarian is a fact, and it reveals an interesting picture. Anti-harmonic processes — similar to the ones found in the native lexemes — are observed in earlier loanwords from German and new loanwords from English.

The present work deals with some of the most recent loanwords from English, and it focuses on the forms which are adapted in Hungarian by employing a verbalizing suffix which further receive a verbal ending, naturally. Anti-harmonic schemes The group of brand new loans from English seems to follow a certain recurring strategy for adapting the borrowed lexemes. The process of reception in Hungarian generates forms. An additional point is the fact that there are some cases where we find hesitation in the choice of suffix allomorph — cf.

Furthermore, a rather interesting manifestation is observed in several cases, namely that harmonic and antiharmonic forms co-exist in the language, but with different semantic implementation. Please, consider the examples provided below. Once verbalized, these recent loans behave according to the rules: they receive suffix forms verbal endings in their paradigm as the vowel harmony regulates in Hungarian, i. They are a challenge to describe, even more so due to the fact that the morphophonological adaptation is processed on different paths, leading to various forms after suffixation.

Labiality — an additional marker A certain group of less recent loans from German or English also demonstrates an intriguing form of anti-harmony: the verbalizing process which triggers the suffixation of the lexeme generates a form which has the root and the suffix with opposite labiality features, i. The semantic aspect: an additional function? Among the richness of anti-harmonic realizations resulting from the adaptation strategy for verb loans in Hungarian, one specific, additional function is also registered. It seems that anti-harmony is also semantically loaded as the choice of harmonic vs anti-harmonic suffixations brings about a difference in the meaning of the adapted forms.

As a result, two different lexemes are formed, as illustrated in the examples below. In the early Slavic borrowings dating from the eleventh to the fifteenth century , we find a different scheme, which, however, again involves the function of harmonizing of the vowel stock of the source form , in regard to root vocal structure. That is, despite the identical sound shape, the two lexemes demonstrate different harmonizing behaviour. This, of course, is explained in terms of historical development of. Yet, nevertheless, the language does have such distinction which might trigger analogy schemes under certain conditions.

With all that in mind, here it was attempted to give pliable answers to the three questions which were marked in the course of the presentation. In sum, it could be stated that in contrast with the native anti-harmonic roots whose description is found in academic grammars, here we encounter a different mechanism of violating vowel harmony in Hungarian. By all means, a further detailed investigation is required in order to give a clearer answer as to whether there is some sort of secondary function of the anti-harmonic realizations.

References Bolonyai, Agnes. In James Cohen, Kara T. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Clemets, G. Vowel and Consonant Disharmony in Turkish. Dordrecht: Mouton de Gruyter. Durand, Jacque. Generative and Non-Linear Phonology. London: Longman. Hulst, Harry van der—Jeroen van de Weijer.

Vowel Harmony. In John A. Goldsmith ed. Oxford: Blackwell. Vowel Harmony and the Stratified Lexicon of Hungarian. The Odd Yearbook 7: 62— Kiefer, Ferenc, ed. In Kiefer, Ferenc ed. Diminutives: Exception to Harmonic Uniformity. Catalan Journal of Linguistics — Theoretical Linguistics 41 1—2 : 1— Hangtan [Phonetics].

Budapest: Osiris. Vishogradska-Meyer, Ina—Savelina Banova. Written discourse completion tasks WDCT were used to collect data from 20 English major university students. By analysing and comparing utterances on the basis of our annotation output and validating the results with the aid of ReCal, we have confirmed that WDCT is a reliable and valid tool for testing ILP competence in speech acts performance.

Keywords: interlanguage pragmatics, research methodology, written discourse completion task. BlumKulka et al. The reason that ILP as a new branch of pragmatics was formed is that a simple contrastive analysis of L1 and L2 pragmatics is not enough in order to take account of interlingual errors that can be associated with pragmatic competence Selinker , Kasper Even with a good command of grammatical and lexical knowledge, students face difficulty in the successful pragmatic production of speech acts, and misunderstandings can often occur as consequences of this lack of pragmatic awareness.

The purpose of the study is twofold: firstly, we would like to introduce the basic terms related to ILP and give an overview of the literature in this field of pragmatics. Secondly, after presenting the different methods of data collection with their specific advantages and disadvantages, the aim is to prove that Written Discourse Completion Test WDCT is a reliable and valid tool when ILP competence in speech acts performance is tested.

Analysis of collected data was done by annotation, which is making a decision for the category of requests in this instance. We want to provide the results of our research on the given dataset with some metric about how certain we are about the annotation. This is where the importance of inter-annotator agreement lies. Inter-annotator agreement is a measure of how well two or more annotators can provide evidence for making the same annotation decisions for certain categories. To put it simple, the validity of research can be proven on statistical grounds by using an inter-annotator tool.

Two statements can be concluded from the measures — if the annotators agree on most of the cases, then the categories are clearly defined, and it also reveals the trustworthiness of the given annotation from a quantitative point of view. Hence, the research problem is to find out how much we can trust previous results by single annotators and how the validity of research can be improved if there is more than one annotator. We will establish evidence with the help of an analysis and comparison of data results from two expert annotators.

Therefore, this research has produced novel results in the field of ILP — firstly, on account of the fact that previous studies Blum-Kulka et al. See further details in the research section. As for the number of annotators, it can be observed that multiple annotators were present in many international research studies cf.

Liu ; however, in Hungary, this method is rare if present at all cf. The majority of studies in Hungary are based on the findings of a single annotator, i. Szili et al. But there are several reasons for having more than one researcher annotating the same data set. First of all, it can easily reveal marginal cases highlighted by inter-annotator disagreements as well as point out fuzzy boundaries between categories. Secondly, when requests are studied, it is important to differentiate between the head act and the supporting move because we cannot be sure with previous cases of the CCSARP project: for example, whether the researcher identified and categorised the head act consistently across the different items in their data sets.

In our present study, we have revealed that multiple annotators could also disagree on which element to categorise as head act and which one as the supportive move in some cases see further details in the results. Situational variability, cross-cultural variability, individual, native versus non-native variability were observed back in the days. As opposed, our research focuses on requests in EFL produced by Hungarian—English major university students. Literature review 2. Kasper ILP can be defined as the performance, acquisition, and production of L2 speech acts Ellis , Kasper and Dahl Leech and Thomas established that pragmatic comprehension is of a double nature: it can be divided into pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics.

On the one hand, pragmalinguistics is concerned with how the linguistic meaning of conveying illocutionary force and politeness is formed. On the other hand, sociopragmatics deals with culture by observing socially adequate and appropriate linguistic behaviour. L2 language users draw conclusions of utterance meaning with the help of more linguistic cues than contextual information despite the fact that they have access to non-literal pragmatic meaning of utterances.

In addition to this, it was observed that different social degrees and approaches are used by native and non-native speakers on a target language cf. Blum-Kulka et al. ILP can give account of the culture-specific variations when observing and analysing interaction during speech acts. It is wrong then to presuppose that based on traditional pragmatic methodological studies behavioural norms could be linking, the study of cultures and cultural background are essential Wierzbicka , ILP, when it is seen as part of the study of L2 use, is concerned with the comprehension and production of speech act in a given second language.

Pragmatic awareness Pragmatic awareness can be defined as awareness of target-language sociolinguistic and sociocultural features or simply as the knowledge about pragmatics underlying appropriate language use. It plays a crucial role when acquiring a foreign language cf. Takahashi Takahashi revealed some relationships between the.

His ILP research has proved that implicit pragmatic instruction helped some but not all learners to notice the target pragmalinguistic features. He also tried to identify the individual difference ID variables, which may enhance the noticing of pragmalinguistic features. Now, let us see the relation between awareness and attention. Furthermore, Tomlin and Villa maintain that attention involves: alertness which is general and related to motivation , orientation which directs input of alertness to the sensory system , and detection which is the cognitive side of input stimuli.

These three are separable, and it can be concluded that awareness is not part of attention. All in all, direct or indirect awareness is a key element in SLA. As we could see from the above mentioned studies, motivation, which is one of the ID variables, is a factor highly affecting L2 pragmatic attention and awareness. Furthermore, proficiency as an affective factor can be seen as an independent operator, although it is true that highly motivated learners at a higher proficiency level may be more aware of pragmalinguistic features than learners with lower motivation at a lower proficiency level.

Studies either examine each particle on its own in terms of its development , or they examine how these components are related to each other and whether any of them is a prerequisite for the development of the other or others cf. Hymes , Kasper Furthermore, Shauer points out another issue: whether or not there is interdependence between grammatical and pragmatic also referred to as sociocultural competence. The findings observed Schauer suggest that these two types of competences are independent; furthermore, ILP studies prove that a higher proficiency level does not correlate with better, more native-like pragmatic ability.

Kasper thoroughly examines cases when grammar supersedes pragmatics, and then she gives scenarios where pragmatic knowledge. As shown by the examples above, pragmatic development can be studied either from the point of view of information processing or from a socio-cognitive theoretical view. EFL learners are outperformed by ESL learners in terms of their ability to notice pragmatic violations, and the ESL group scored as high as the native speaker control group.

Internal and external modifiers can be differentiated in speech acts, too. If the internal modifier increases the illocutionary force of the request, we can speak about an upgrader, whilst if it decreases the illocutionary force, then it can be referred to as a downgrader. External modifiers can be referenced as supportive moves, which support the request with additional statements.

As an example, a grounder is the reason for a request for it to be carried out. The research also confirmed that internal modifiers are acquired earlier than external modifiers, which were the findings of previous studies, too. ILP development is influenced by the duration of stay in a L2 environment and by individual learner differences.

Future studies with focus on the investigation of teaching methods, approaches, activities, and learning goals could also reveal what enhances better pragmatic awareness. Moreover, it is proved that contrastive analysis of L1 and L2 pragmatics is not enough to take account of pragmatic transfer, and interlanguage pragmatics is proposed to figure out the possible reasons for this phenomenon cf. Blum-Kulka , Schauer , Szili et. It is possible to differentiate positive and negative transfer of pragmatic nature. Positive transfer facilitation in connection with request occurs when a non-native speaker uses a request strategy which is not a universal one but a pragmalinguistic feature which can be attributed to their mother tongue.

Requests in pragmatic universals can be performed directly, conventionally indirectly, and indirectly. Negative transfer interference occurs when the applied structure or expression is applicable in L1 but not perfect in L2. As far as communicative effect is concerned, negative pragmatic transfer is not equal to pragmatic failure or miscommunication, although it can lead to it. Also, pragmalinguistic divergence, which is often regarded as a linguistic problem, is not as serious as a sociopragmatic one, which can be understood as a means of conveying bad manners or being rude Thomas , in Kasper As a conclusion, L1 pragmatic preference patterns greatly influence L2 performance.

Data collection 3. As it is hardly possible, there are quite a few options for different empirical research methods in speech act studies, namely ethnographic fieldwork, role-plays, discourse completion tests, and multiple choice questionnaires cf. Brown , Szili et al. Naturally, it takes long to assimilate into the culture of the observed individuals, if it is possible at all. Further issues related to the field notes method, for example, are recording the speech situation and noting down the exact words from memory, as fieldworkers do not use tapes or video recording in order to ensure a naturalistic setting for the research.

Despite the limitations of this method, many speech act. Role-plays cf. The best scenario is when they can be themselves and behave as they would normally do in a pre-described situation given by the researcher. Actual spoken data can be produced and observed through the use of this method. Although longer responses are collected in these life-like situations, the participants might not act naturally as they might feel pressured to do so. On the one hand, the researcher could be in control of specific variables such as gender relationships between interlocutors, situations, power status and distance of participants, and other social factors, too.

Tran In this way, the observed speech act can be elicited and observed in a natural-like setting, while the method also involves careful planning and research design. Another method is using multiple choice questionnaires, which could provide a large amount of data with quick annotation, as the assessed individuals only need to choose their preferred response from a given set of answers.

Obvious disadvantages include the fact that spoken discourse is represented in a written form and that the small number of choices mean limited insights for the researcher. Finally, written discourse completion tests DCTs explain the given situations to the research subjects followed by some space to write their answers. It is an appropriate method for the collection of a large amount of data in a short period of time and the comparison of native and non-native speakers in a highly controlled research design. Mey , amongst others, criticised the use of WDCTs due to construct validity.

In sum, WDCT is a pragmatic tool which requires in this case strangers to read a written description of a variety of situations with highly controlled contextual parameters, such as participant roles and the degree of imposition, in order to write down what would be said in that given situation to represent an oral-like SA. Therefore, in our research, we treat the choices of the speakers being observed as pragmatically appropriate linguistic forms and not as actual discourse episodes.

Many researchers have applied this form of data collection [cf. However, Kim suggests that other methods of data collection, such as roleplays, could reveal more about the pragmatic performance in communicative context in a more near-authentic setting. Also, elicited conversations could be used to observe the targeted speech acts in higher frequency over a limited time. Their research results proved that WDCT scored high both on reliability and validity when interlanguage pragmatic competence in speech act performance was tested.

Now, let us move onto our research agenda. The research 4. Methodology This paper presents a cross-sectional study cf. As far as the timeframe of data collection is concerned, students were given an hour to finalize their answers, which was more than enough time, and they did not feel rushed at all. Participants Data was elicited from 20 respondents in altogether cases in order to investigate L2 linguistic proficiency and the acquisition of pragmatic competence among advanced Hungarian learners of English with the help of WDCT tasks, with a more detailed description to follow.

As previously mentioned, WDCT can be recognized as a reliable and very effective, time-efficient method of pragmatic data collection, which will also be proven by results later on cf. In this way, the researcher had full control over the language, the context, and the social distance in the individual items of the data set. Participants were between the ages of 18 and 26 with the vast majority of them aged 19—21, who had been studying English as a second language mostly for 10—12 years but had not been exposed to direct pragmatic instruction or courses before the study took place.

The results showed that mood derivable, hedged performative, and preparatory strategies were predominantly used by students in their native Hungarian language, while other strategies were rarely present, which correlates with previous research findings Szili However, the negative transfer of these strategies results in more directness in requests during EFL communication than native speakers would have.

Annotators The collected data was analysed by two expert annotators, i. The male annotator is also a university associate professor, while the female annotator is a final-year PhD student of English linguistics. As for their education around the request categories, they both carried out an extensive research on previous works written by Blum-Kulka et al. The annotators then uploaded their results onto the ReCal online system to assess inter-annotator agreement further details to follow below.

For this present study, the data collecting instrument was an adaptation of Blum-Kulka et al. The questionnaire situations were slightly changed and adapted to the modern age and tailored for the audience of English major students. Models of analysis designed by Blum-Kulka et al. With regards to on record, it can be done without redressive action, baldly or with redressive action either as a positive or negative politeness strategy. The discourse completion task comprised 3 different scenarios: requesting for pen and paper, borrowing a mobile phone, lecture notes requests. After a short description of the situation involving setting the scene, participants were asked to formulate requests in English in 3 different ways based on familiarity and social power relations, respectively.

The table below shows the coding categories and provides examples. Table 1. Request descriptive categories based on Blum-Kulka et al. Mood Derivable Clean up the kitchen. Hedged Performative I would like to ask you to move your car. Want Statement I would like you to clean the kitchen.

Suggestory Formulae 7. Query Preparatory 8. Strong Hints A 9. Mild Hints B. Could you clean up the mess in the kitchen? The greatest advantages of this system-independent operating program are that its data specification is general and that it offers more reliability coefficients than any other competing products. The software manual is also available online and is complemented by research articles and scholarly documentations by the authors on their website, which greatly helps annotators to understand the software and how to interpret results.

In content analysis, reliability is usually estimated using the above-mentioned four estimation tools Lombard et al. Percentage agreement is easily calculated as a percentage of agreements 1 — perfect agreement code and nonagreements 0 — non-agreement code. Chances of agreement due to its dual variability of 0 and 1 values were challenged by Krippendorff As we have seen from the involvement of. Another part of the results calculated by ReCal lists number of agreements, disagreements, cases, and decisions.

In the present study, cases i. Further details will follow later. Results As we mentioned in the previous section, ReCal was used to calculate interannotator agreement, which yielded the values presented in Table 2 below. The software allows multiple annotators to work on the same file, and therefore it is able to measure inter-annotator agreement. Our observations concluded that most of the cases where inter-annotator disagreements occurred fall into the following categories: 1 type 1 Annotator 1: strategy 7, Annotator 2: strategy 8 Example: a Excuse me, I happened to hear that you will be late from a meeting.

Could you please, lend me the notes you made? I understand that you think going back to be a closed club on your island is the solution to your problems. I think that was part of your problem and why lots of you think you are not a part of us. I feel you are a part of me, of us. And I am sad you do not feel the same. Without recourse to a neighbouring country free to send help, as Britain did. So more than any other thing what we all need most to retain is sovereignty. We do not need to compete just because we are separate, and we do not need to give up our self-governance to work together.

In fact, that is the ONLY way we can safely work together. The regulations that come from the EU are good for UK citizens on the whole,such as workers rights and consumer rights. The UK government could have controlled immigration more if they really wanted to without leaving the EU. EU politicians are democratically elected.

It is the the very wealthy in this country who call the shots and they wanted immigration so they can keep wages down aided by the con servative government who are ruling at present and are the reason why the nhs is suffering and the country is going downhill for most people appart from small percentage who are very wealthy. U government like because it didnt fall your way- as a convinced brexiter, my choice based on real- world facts and implications of total immersion in the subject at every level- i decided that the sheeple of the uk wouldnt vote against being governed from abroad , in a foreign country, by foreign elected councils, i decided to emigrate once again, out of the EU such were my convictions and the strength of them.

Yes, if you support Brexit, you are a traitor, without doubt. It will destroy our country. Brexit, as a concept was voted for. The final outcome, not. If you believe in democracy so much, give us a vote on the outcome, including remaining in the EU. No thanks, I plan to stay and undermine it. This is MY country too. Never forgot that. BTW you have yet to refute my statement on the lack of democracy for the little people that exists in EU. The governance structures of the EU are similar to those in Communist dictatorships, e.

Korea, China etc. A self selected elite determines what happens and you question them at your peril. My understanding is that individual commissioners cannot be fired for any reason, the only recourse is to fire the entire commission. Have not seen that happen yet in 40 plus years despite butter mountains, wine lakes, feather bedding of land owners, subsidies for climatically stupid crops like Maize in the UK. It will never reach proper maturity i. Such a sensible system eh? Au contraire Justin it is you who should do the research. The EU democratic, really.

How about the fact that the EU commission decided in its ideological wisdom to insist that male and female drivers should pay equal premiums all in the name of equality. Now to add insult to injury using the same ideological stance of equality for all the uninsured who previously would not have been able to claim as they were breaking the law can now make a claim.

The law abiding amongst us are having to pay for this and that includes me and there is nothing I can do about it and that is from Mr Hammond. Democracy, give me a break. Go do your homework and keep above all an open mind and deal with facts not beliefs. There are none so blind as will not see. Stupid,coward… etc etc..

I wasnt afraid to venture into the world on my own. Mummy or daddy didnt hold my hand and pay for me.. Started flipping burgers, and worked my way up into top companys in good jobs. Hardly cowardly is it? I saw what europe had brought for the average joe in france, it virtually ruined many. Lower pay, higher costs, jobs moved abroad, becoming just a serf to capitalism. Hardly cowardice. In fact you are the coward. Emigrate, move closer to your eldorado. Just what happened to you as a child?

Another vote, just like the EU did to the Irish when they turned down the proposed constitution, or have we all forgotten that? I am afraid your emotions are all o show. How unBritish. Everyone I know wants out and as quickly as possible. I guarantee the author has been asking the wrong people.

Polls can be fixed by various means. Wording the question. Who you ask etc. Our own personal bubbles to one side — if you seek corruption you need look no further than the referendum. Plus, knowing where — or even what, you are leaving, says nothing at all about where you are going. I know only smart, careful people who have done the maths, and found Brexit to be seriously wanting.

I would be very happy to find a plus side to Brexit. There is none. We have only had one advisory referendum — the responses to which were mixed, to say the least. Therefor there is no change to the status quo indicated. It is unfortunate that no alternative to the cross-Party approved Tory policy was put before the electorate last June, but this does in no way set the future course of UK Politics. It is entirely within the law and perfectly admissible under our Constitution, for this situation to change at any time.

This has everything going for it. Do you have any evidence that most Britains want to leave the EU? Do you have any evidence that the EU is corrupt? Please share. This has actually been examined fairly conclusively and they vote the same as their age group tranches would indicate. And if everyone had voted they would have voted Remain by a small margin. See the Kings College study. It is time to make it compulsory to vote in uk now, end all speculation on the apathy of non voters. It is already having major economic effects that risk destroying the very industries that enable our economy to prosper perhaps yes, not all of our citizens, but resolving that problem is a matter for our own Government, not the EU.

Now does that seem constitutional or advisable or democratic?

Basic Hungarian You Need to Know

I must declare an interest. My children are dual national and my wife is Polish. I will be dramatically affected I now feel a foreigner in my own country and my wife, and therefore myself, may be forced out of the country I love. But I still assert that the point I make above remains valid. Continue with Brexit at the peril of all of us. But the majority of the electorate voted to leave. The problem now is, regardless of how much research shows that the referendum result would change over time, or change if taken again, there is now no mechanism to put that to the test, because ALL parties have said there should be no second referendum.

The majority of the electorate did NOT elect to remain. The electorate was 46 milllion. Thats where the problem is. If only we had compulsory voting or at least the interest the scots had in their own referendum democracy would emerge. There was a vote. MPs, when discussing this Referendum, voted for the referendum.

There was a result. And the result should be accepted. It is immaterial that people did not vote. They had the chance to vote. Nobody forced them to not vote. Also, Nissan are rapidly expanding. Just two examples. And, what does having a Polish wife to do with it? She can quite happily live in the UK. My Greek friends here applauded our decision and hope to get their own country back.. Back from Brussels dictatorship. They know that the current financial problems are thos of their own making and are willing to make up for it — but not at the expense of their country.

The referendum was advisory. The economic auguries are not good at all — we risk destroying are leading industries — finance, high tech — all to prevent immigration which pays for our retirement with its social security contributions. The point I make is that by the time we should be leaving the referendum result will be out of date, both among those who would vote, and in the opinion of the electorate. We will leave against the will of the people. Is that democratic? The mainstream media choosing to pick out stories about how Brexit is negatively affecting us?

How about the fact the pound plummeted immediately after the result? Was that Fake News? Did they cherry-pick that one? How about all the jobs that will be next to impossible if we lose freedom of movement? Is that made up? How about all the jobs that will be lost well with Europe? Because in this country, the two most popular newspapers supported your stupid cause; but you still go on brainlessly about the horrors of mainstream media. Any British person who claims that MSM ruins everything by being biased against brexit, is instantaneously an idiot in my eyes. If you look at the list of newspapers by circulation, you will notice that 4 are pro-brexit, 4 neutral or non-committal and 2 remain.

Well said Joseph A. I voted out, would do so again in a heartbeat, and maintain it is the right decision. The EU is corrupt, self-serving, and is certainly no friend of the UK. The only valid reason to remain is a cultural one — those who wish to become European, as part of a EU superstate. I along with the majority of Britons dp not consider myself European — I am British and proud of it. The referendum was the first opportunity in my lifetime to have my say. No one ever gave me the chance before, just years and years of half-baked rhetoric and EU propaganda.

I do not hate Europe, I holiday there twice yearly, and love the people and culture, and I too should declare an interest: I am about to move to Spain, having bought a villa there, and Brexit will make that more problematical. Still I voted leave, in the full knowledge this wold be so. And one other thing — nobody in their right mind would believe we are about to start deporting people who live here — that is simply anti Brexit propaganda of which there is much, led by the liberal wooly thinkers and theorisers so well trumpeted by their mouthpiece the BBC.

Think about it — the facts are incontrovertible!! Take back control from the unelected EU elite! Do we all understand how our parliament works? Our Government has to pass its laws through the unelected, elite House of Lords. Nothing actually comes into law until the reigning monarch accepts it. Our Prime Minister was given her title by default when all the other tories ran away from the responsibility. Nobody voted for her to be leader.

And this unelected leader is now going to use an advisory referendum to enact the biggest change to our constitution in decades. Meanwhile, having a team of experienced civil servants, some of them voted in by us, the British people, preside over EU law-making seems like a far more democratic and sensible system of law-making.

We now look like fools to the rest of the world, and our currency is plummeting just to prove it. Deportations are not just anti-Brexit propaganda. Also, even without Deportations per se, leaving the EU gives EU citizens resident here much less of a stake in the country, almost certainly gives them a pile of paperwork to sort out if they want to stay, and would likely deprive them of the right to vote in their local elections etc. Also, blaming the Germans and other foreigners for the failure of our gvt to support our industries is a bit rich… given the chance, our own companies would happily have snapped up foreign ones wherever they were allowed to as well.

If you investigate, you will find that German Engineering Companies are run by Engineers and the workers are represented on the board. Ours are run by Accountants who only want to make a quick buck. Our real problem is our electoral system is so poor that we are saddled with mostly poor governments. I agree there are plenty of things wrong with the EU, but most of them have little effect on our daily lives. The benefits in trade and human rights are much greater. I too am part Polish; my father was Polish.

That does not mean that I, in any way, feel alienated. I am sick of listening to the nonsense people are coming out with. Why is it that so many of us, particularly those in the financial areas of London, and others, feel that the rest of the country are wrong in their decision to vote for Brexit. If we do not agree which of our MPs have been voted in should we then decide to boycott the decision and do everything in our power to overturn the decision of the majority; if someone is elected to the House of Lords and we do not agree with the decision to put them there for whatever reason should we demonstrate against the decision.

We are supposed to live in a democratic society. A vote has been made and we should all abide by it, but it appears that we are only a democratic society when the decision suits certain people. When we joined the EU things were very different and a lot of the laws and changes that have been made have been to the detriment of this country. Stop treating us like morons who have no idea what we have voted for. Most voters, irrespective of their vote, listened to the arguments and did not make their decision lightly, weighing up the pros and cons.

What exactly do you mean by this? The same is true for any UK citizen voting in the Rep. Continually paid my taxes and never claimed benefits. On the contrary, poll after poll shows the people who voted to leave now regret their decision: they regret falling for lies; they regret isolating the country; they regret the rise in xenophobia they caused. Brexit is not the wil of the people — it is the imposition of something approaching fascism by the few on the many, and must be stopped.

AS to polls. I would have thought that polls would now be looked at askance, they got Brexit wrong they got Trump wrong. They are in effect somewhat unscientific because the numbers polled are too small and from a restricted set of society at large. The Eu is essentially undemocratic and run by appointees who cannot be removed individually from office. It is essentially a dictaorship, benigb possibly but capable of going the other way.

  1. 12 Rules for Learning Foreign Languages in Record Time — The Only Post You’ll Ever Need.
  2. arm-reich 1 (German Edition)!
  3. Fat Control: The NET Equation.
  4. The Power of Film Translation;
  5. A Real Christian: The Life of John Wesley.
  6. Evelyn Eichmüller.
  7. Utilitarianism in Victorian England (with a special emphasis on | Hausarbeiten publizieren.
  8. I want to choose who writes the rules for me and mine.. Ashamed, because of the damage to our currency,because of the open racism it has promoted amongst the thicker classes and ashamed for falling for the downright lies of Boris and Co, who now seem to have gone very quiet. And embarassed by the other two thickoes, Fox and Davis, who have already fucked up over premature, illegal negotiations with the Australians.

    Start thinking, instead of rehashing untruths. Adrian, the pound was lower against the Euro back in Dec than it is at present. Pound goes up. It goes down. Industry is carrying on and will continue to do so. Nissan,another large manufacturing Japanese company is expanding. The UK will soon be free. We are well rid of the EU, I do not know a single Brexit voter who has changed their mind. This is just a fabrication by people such as yourself who refuse to accept reality.

    Grow up, or shut up. The only person rehashing untruths here is you! I am from Singapore, having been living here for nearly 30 years. I voted leave. Yes, it will be painful in the first few years by leaving the current form of EU. But with determination, vision and a good leadership, I believe this country will thrive and prosper in the years to come. Singapore left Malaysia 50 years ago.

    We are grateful for Lee Kuan Yew, our then prime misinter for taking us out of the Union. It was tough but we made it. Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore. What about the I think Deffo E. The 18 to 23 year olds had the lowest turn out by age groups in the referendum so I hardly think that the 16 to 17 not 18 year olds would of made a huge difference. The majority of the eligible electorate voted leave.

    Constitutional issues were not raised prior to the referendum. Why raise them now? Karl, your verifications and citations for your assertion appear to be missing from your post! Please supply! What a nonsense article. Statistically the numbers of each side not showing up because they think it was a foregone conclusion would be virtually equal.

    I suspect a sizeable majority of those complaining about the result in the various marches stayed home on the day. Now of course the media want to convince us that because leaving is so hard we might as well stay. The British people are not stupid we are not staying in an arrangement we cannot leave. Not willingly anyway. As for the youth wanting to travel the world the Commonwealth is still open to us, most of which has better weather than Europe and speaks English!

    Utter tosh. I voted to leave the EU and I still stand by that decision. The EU is a corrupt anti-individual establishment that is brick by brick designed to disenfranchise the individual and give power to corrupt corporations and political idealogy. The analysis is what it is. However, Parliament has to act on the vote, not the analysis of it, which can be represented in any number of ways that personally support your thesis, or even personal belief system. A version of this is what the EU practices now in the states that it controls.

    But it would, for example, have nullified the Labour landslide in given the revulsion of Blair that presented itself a few years later, and probably the election of the Coalition government in But back to the thesis, which is that one portrayal of a particular interpretation of a statistical theory is enough to override the democratic process.

    You may argue that since an elected government only lasts five years, this is less important, but far too many flimsy hypotheses also hang on that supposition. Chief amongst which is that it is not possible to destroy a country that badly after only five years. But as we have shown, Labour historically gives it a try each time. Perhaps we should be protected from Labour? Perhaps not; instead, just pointless economic platitudes and attempts to airbrush democracy in favour of a self-selecting oligarchy that thinks it knows better than the people it wants to control.

    Just get us out of Europe NOW. Lets Get on with it I did not voted for the common market as you could see it was going to wind up very much where we are now. Just want to go on record stating this person does not, will not, and could not speak for me, even though the writer would like you to believe that. UK is better off out. Though the current crop of elite are too worried about losing all the fat they have accumulated for the last 10 years and to that end will forecast doom and gloom.

    We need to address whether there is a real movement for leaving the EU and all the evidence suggests otherwise. If your concerns are really to do with migration , these can be sorted by government policies and have nothing to do with the EU. Outside will cause grave economic damage and that risk cannot be born by the younger working generations. Only one person so far as answered in the affirmative. The majority of newspapers, including the popular ones Sun, Mail, Express, Telegraph were all harpy screeching in favour of leaving, often after years of dangerously misleading headlines. I am an unemployed former bankrupt and committed remainer.

    Please explain how I am part of any elite. What absolute nonsense, thankfully, we do not live in Australia, here people are free to choose whether they vote or not. Those who chose not to vote, have no right to complain about the consequences of their inaction. The majority of those who engaged in the democratic process, were in favor of leaving, and consequently that is the right and proper democratic path. Of course, you are incorrect in your unsubstantiated opinion and, as the professor has indicated, the later opinion polls show that to be the case.

    On top of those groups denied a vote that he refers to are large numbers of the ex pat community living in the EU or elsewhere. I think it is highly likely that the majority of them would also have voted to remain. There is of course one very simple solution to the current mess. Hold another referendum but this time do it properly and include everyone who has a stake in the outcome, wherever they may live and certainly all British citizens.

    Absolute nonsense! If we apply your logic to local and general elections then the country would be in a perpetual state of a paralysis forevermore. Rightly or wrongly a decision has been made, now we must move forward as best as we can. A day was chosen long in advance on which people could register their vote, and the deadline was even extended. Is he talking about the same polls and pollsters who forcast a Remain victory in the first place? Prior to that they got the general election wrong. If the remainers had won, then, presumably, democracy would have categorically triumphed.

    Minority vote pushed by the rabid right wing media moguls again. Brexitmongers will just have to suck it up, get used to it. Bearing in mind that we were deliberately lied to about loss of sovereignty when we joined the then Common Market Heath admitted as such on Question Time when Peter Sissons chaired it people have had every right to complain. Manufacturing is going well. Likewise the pound is doing its normal ups and downs — still well above the last low back in Dec And, if you truly believe in democracy, so should you be. The failure to allow year olds to vote, when they are so clearly more affected than anyone else, was and is a travesty.

    If it was about the future of the UK then those with the longest future in this nation should have been entitled to vote. Brexit, irrespective of how it plays out, is one of the biggest cons on the UK public, and people like Karl above, who ignore facts and refuse to acknowledged the reality of the situation, are the reason the likes of BoJo and Farage can get ahead. Oh here we go. This nonsense line that they have to live with it longer and therefore they deserve more of a say is an attack on the very idea of democracy.

    Older people did not vote to sabotage the country as you would have to believe for this drivel about 16 year olds to make sense. This is rubbish. I am I watch question time, I read the news, I have my own opinions and knowledge to form informed decisions. Ellie, your final comment proves that you and people of your age group can be mature enough to vote. You evidently have a mature attitude as well as an educated mind. There are a few comments her from people much older than you who do not show your maturity.

    WB, what a patronising twit you are! It certainly does not mean of the privileged few who hold a piece of paper that allows them to vote! The only reason for a vote it to see what the largest number of voters wanted from the question asked. How can you then rule the country? Dictatorship, military rule just what we need to stop anarchy. I think you would be a good dictator Justin. Absolute rubbish. Is this article for real? Yes, a snap opinion poll on one particular day, with the result so close that on a different day it might be a different result.

    All good news at the moment. Pound happy, well above its last low of Dec Manufacturing exporting well. Nissan recently announced further expansion.

    • The Power of Film Translation;
    • Passwort vergessen?.
    • Politeness In Europe.
    • How to Learn Any Language Fast and Never Forget It | The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss.
    • A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthurs Court, Part 9..
    • Field Manual FM 3-11 MCWP 3-37.1 NWP 3-11 AFTTP 3-2.42 Multi-Service Doctrine for Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Operations July 2011.

    Latest forecasts are good. I am not specifically advocating a second referendum in the article, just recognising there are very strong feelings indeed from groups who felt disenfranchised despite paying UK taxes and the reality that the Brexit decision will directly, and potentially dramatically affect their own futures either in the UK or abroad. And just who are these groups who feel disenfranchised despite paying UK taxes? Are you implying that the ludicrous suggestion already mentioned on here that people from other EU countries living and working here should have been able to vote in the referendum has merit?

    Why should they? Frequently there is a majority expecting that immigration will reduce and the NHS will stay much the same but apart from that, more think the economy, UK influence, trade, travel, pensions and jobs will all get worse as a result. I, like so many, thought long and hard before I voted to leave.

    I knew that we could be in for a difficult period if we decided to leave the EU but, on balance, I believed that was a price worth paying to be free of the EU and all its self inflicted problems. Therefore when I complete a survey I answer it honestly but still make it clear I support leaving the EU. The problem with the Remain supporters is that they did not even contemplate that they may lose the referendum and, having done so, they are scratching around looking for excuses to overturn the result. That initial referendum was fair and people knew what they were voting for, so no, there should be no second referendum.

    This country is now a ruinous laughing stock because of your stupidity. Life will soon get much harder; we will turn inwards, bitter and twisted upon ourselves. I used to love this country, but fools like you have taken it from me. Many of these abandoned people still pay taxes in the UK on their pensions etc, and yet were excluded simply because the promise made by Cameron to remove the 15 year limit was not enacted.

    That would have changed the vote. Low, would you be interested in contacting me by email, please. Many thanks in advance. Cordially Claire. The only argument ever spouted from the mouths of Leavers. Excellent article, full of common sense. I would go even further, by saying that the Referendum was never a sane or sensible way to decide the issue, and should be invalid by default.

    The public were wilfully and systematically misled by lies, exaggerations, misinformation and promises the Leave campaign had no intention of keeping or even any power to keep. Very few people understood what they were voting for. People voted Leave only because they saw their current situation, were dissatisfied with it, and believed they could improve it by taking the choice offered to them. The very government that put them into that sorry situation was able to dupe them into taking a self-harming decision, in the mistaken belief that it would solve their problems.

    But well done, Brexiters, for handing over unregulated power to the people who did. There was also an administrative foul up with many local authorities failing to send out the postal votes to overseas citizens in time for inclusion in the ballot. Both Karl and Mike demonstrate contempt for real democracy.

    Apart from anything else, in real democracy there is an opportunity to change decisions, it is not a one off, especially if many of those most affected are disenfranchised. Norway-like, Swiss-like etc. If they think that future referendums would be non-democratic, then they invalidate the result of the one we had. It is unbelievable how many people oppose democracy in the UK including those very people who are supposed to represent us in the first place.

    Our democracy is based upon the sovereignty of the House of Commons. Any attempt to block debate on this matter is undemocratic. Get over it. Major constitutional change? Why was the EU referendum advisory and why not a required percentage of the electorate? Very interesting analysis, thanks. It confirms the idea that Brexit was won on issuing a lot of last minute promises by the Leavers lies and poor tactics and over-confidence from the Remain side. Seriously, you pro-leave people have nothing positive to say at all.

    I suspect it would have been a landslide victory for Remain. Brexit was correct. NOT a democratic vote — see the other comments about those of us excluded because of living outside the UK for more than 15 years estimated at about 2 million out of over 6 million UK citizens abroad , the young, the lost postal votes, the Irish and Commonwealth voters! Further, many of us have been working in the interest of our country while abroad — how does that constitute abandonment?

    Try and find out some facts! It cannot be ignored that the referendum result was very, very close. This is estimated at over 1m Financial Times resident for over 15 years in Europe and near 2m in the rest of the world. Considering that vast majority of our peer nations e. USA, France, Australia etc allow life-long voting in referenda by all their citizens in possession of a passport it seems that the UK is out of step in depriving such a large number a vote last June. Gibraltarians are not allowed to vote in UK general elections but were allowed to vote in the EU referendum.

    Surely this was an unjustifiable denial of democracy to those who may be among the most impacted by any change from the status quo? It would certainly have had a marked effect on the outcome in June. I still think constitutionally Brexit is unethical. We vote democratically to elect a Parliament. A referendum is supposed to be an opinion of the mood of the people at that time.

    Bent polls with Remain bias before the referendum. Same bent polling companies, same bias, after the referendum. And with the scandals breaking over the US presidential elections and rigged polls now, the polling companies will have a lot more questions to answer. There is only ONE poll that matters and that was the votes of the people on June 23rd.

    Then they made their choice! THAT is what democracy is about, and thank the heavens that the people of Britain were finally able to force the establishment to hold the referendum they had been wiggling out of for years! Dangerous game being played in this article, all who want to be EU citizens have two years to apply for citizenship in an EU member state. You will probably find Lithuania very welcoming! Bent and biased polling?

    Any evidence to back up that assertion? Got to choose electorate moaned about in the article. The writer would happily change things ad infinitum until Remain won. Well, at least we have been spared the nauseating suggestion that the elderly should be disenfranchised. And Leave won by getting people who had never voted before to vote; a remarkable achievement would took everybody by surprise. Yes, it really is unbelievable. Yet, it is happening. We will not have heard the last of it.

    Globalisation as per the international high finance and transnational corporations has a stack of supporters who feel totally dependent upon the employ and perks given them by big business. Then there are the academics and a lot of workers who feel threatened by Brexit. They are unable to function in the wider world without a sinecure on the federalisation gravy train. For me, the answer is another referendum soon. If a majority vote for going back on the earlier referendum, the people of the UK will have made a fateful decision they will have to live with until the EU collapses, which could be a few years yet.

    For almost every carp they can think of they will have a sitting duck target. Btw, I must confess, I am totally in favour Brexit, anti-EU, a Dutch citizen living in Oz and hoping to retire in Europe, sometime, Anglophile and supporter of democracy to boot. Good night, folks. The social basis of the Brexit is evaporating faster than anyone expected. If Corbyn wants to […]. This is only an extra reason to give the British people a vote by referendum at the end of the Brexit negotiations.

    The question should be whether, after knowing what a Brexit does really look like, the people still support a Brexit. After asking the people whether a Brexit process should be started, it is also fair the ask them how it should be ended: To accept the deal and exit the EU or not to accept it and to stay. The British people started this process and they should also decide how it is ended. That is just fair! Since there is so much doubt, and since it is splitting the country so much, and since a referendum is a referral to the general public to advise Parliament before they make an act of parliament why do we not simply do it again?

    The cost of another referendum to check the public opinion would be insignificant compared to the economic consequences either way. Its not simply a case of a clear result, and we are all falling apart because of it. In the interest of Unity why not simply do it again; after all everyone is better informed given the debate since the referendum has turned up more information than we were ever given before.

    The interest should be in moving forward with a clear mandate to do something which is clearly defined. If the will of the people really is to leave then there should be no fear that that is still the case. And if there is considerable doubt about it then a second referendum should provide clarity either way. Seems a good article, and by no means scientific, 3 people I know now regret their vote to leave. Leavers are scared, as they know when there is another referendum, which there will be, they will lose soundly! The only reason that the 16 and 17 year olds were given the vote in Scotland was because it was thought that they would vote for independence, the answer was still no.

    Also, EU citizens who have made their life here on the basis of European citizenship had no say in a referendum which will remove their right to stay and has unleashed a wave of xenophobia. They should have been consulted. I think once the economic impacts start being felt, they will do so. And there should certainly be a referendum on the Brexit strategy proposed — which seems not to have been decided as yet — since what we are being apparently considered, as much as one can determine from the runes, is nothing like what was discussed by the Leave campaign during the referendum.

    The rest of the article seems to be trying to magic into existence an electorate prepared to vote Remain. The referendum bill does not say anywhere that the referendum would be advisory only and lastly, we voted as one United Kingdom, NOT as 4 separate countries so the overall result is the one that counts. Referendums are always advisory unless expressly otherwise — the advice to the public and Parliament clearly says it.

    Table of contents

    What the Government said has nothing to do with the constitution — that is determined by the law. We have seen with Mrs. You may be right constitutionally about the power of the constituent parts of the UK, but most other federal countries and since devolution the UK has become a federal country like it or not require all constituent parts to be in favour. You can take that line, but that means you are in favour of a kingdom, not a United Kingdom. If you want that, then say so. I would prefer the UK to stay together in the EU.

    Brexit is not the will of the British people – it never has been

    Thanks Adrian, Interesting article. They take advantage of the current situation as the UK have granted ie by exercising free movement to the UK. Regardless, these points about the franchise should not be thought criticisms of the referendum result, but as failings of Parliament, which passed the bill with these limitations almost unanimously save the SNP MPs.

    I am also not convinced that non-voters can be relied upon. There is a distinction to be drawn between those who wished to vote, but could not eg because of irregularities with the postal voting process , whose voice should be considered, and those who chose not to, whether out of complacency of the result or disinterested inertia. To contemplate the possible actions of non-voters at each vote brings significant uncertainty to every election and referendum.

    No, I struggle to doubt the validity of the referendum result. Your arguments, and others, point instead to the defects of referendums, which make them wholly unsuited to make decisions on anything but the most simple of topics and even then I doubt them.

    Nice one. I assume the vast majority of those people would vote to stay in the EU, adding further to the revision in favour of Remain. Let us just understand the main thing here. The decision has been made and the people have spoken. It always comes down to so much negativity. A great deal on the table but some twit in the EU decided not to take it on.

    Do we still want to deal with these buerocratic fat cats which think what is best for other countries like the UK! Wrong on CETA. Where is the UK parliamentary debate on this? British journalism thinks of itself as uniquely excellent. It is more illuminating to think of it as uniquely awful. Few European countries have newspapers that are as partisan, misleading and confrontational as some of the overmighty titles in this country. The possibility of Brexit could only have happened because of the British press — if there were no other good reason for voting to remain, the hope of denying the press their long-craved triumph on Europe would suffice for me.

    As far as the EU and its workings are concerned, the British public are perhaps the most misinformed in Europe — independent of whether they are for or against membership. There have, over decades, been nothing but streams of increasingly vicious and sustained attacks against the EU that have been relentless in their intensity. Agreed, it has been democracy of a sort, consisting of lies, manipulative propaganda and downright coercion promoted and instigated by a vicious right-wing press.

    And it achieved the very same democratic mandate that allowed the German Chancellor to gain power in the thirties, completely legitimately. He did it most certainly via the democratic vote, but that vote itself was fed by lies, half-truths, twisted statistics or no statistics at all, manipulation, and an appeal to the lowest common denominator.

    In short, it was a farce. There has never been a level playing field in over forty years of membership. Remember the manipulative headlines of two decades ago? But none were true! No country on earth could withstand this relentless avalanche of misinformation and blatant fabrication and yet remain unaffected and without eventually succumbing to its baleful influence.

    The Referendum was, no doubt, all very pretty! But it was never democracy. Not by a mile! Or even responsible. Cameron no doubt excuses the thoroughly divisive catastrophe he presided over by saying he is a democrat and acted democratically. It is hardly elitism to say that you simply cannot extend the sole reins of power to those whose main interests in life have been anything BUT politics, economy and the manifest destiny of nations. Before the Referendum, 80 economists warned of the economic dangers that leaving the EU would impose on the UK. Do you equate the views of 80 economists with 80 fish-and-chip shop owners in the Midlands?

    The Referendum did! Had democracy been paramount, Britain would have reverted to capital punishment several decades ago, and would not have invaded Iraq or Libya. Eurosceptics have whined, complained and moaned for over forty years. In future it will be the turn of the Remainers. This article is well written and well reasoned. I would love to feel more optimistic about a post-brexit future but the outlook seems predominantly negative. There are two things I find deeply frustrating:. If you accept the paper-thin majority who voted to leave the EU, the only thing that justifies is leaving the EU.

    Any attempt to justify anything else is invalid. Speaking as a 50 year old, I am somewhat embarrassed by this. This is on the basis that the decision to overturn a stable social and economic situation requires overwhelming support to carry out effectively. To the point, of any of the people commenting on this board, I would ask was your life so terribly affected by the EU, that a completely unknown, costly and possibly disastrous future in a deeply divided country is preferable? There should be no second referendum for the same reason there should not have been one in the first place: there was no substantive EU treaty alteration that would have required it.

    Referenda outcomes are matters for Parliament to ratify, whatever the results. Robert Hunter, if you wish to raise manifesto promises you will have to include the promise Labour made to the British people that the European constitution — later Lisbon — would be voted on. Tribal politics in the UK has resulted in a three-party stitch-up on the EU issue, and the people have not been able to have a say.

    Free of political tribalism, the people gave an honest assessment of what they thought of the European Union. The British public did not vote to join the UK. It was the Politicians and business men. The people who would gain to make money and publicity out of it. The British public have now voted for Brexit so why are you politicians still fighting against your voters and supporters. We want our own identity, our own British pound, our own religions and cultures kept and treasured just as we enjoy and respect the many different cultures around the world.

    Get on with Brexit and stop treating us like uneducated individuals without a mind of our own. Think of the obstacles. All we need now is for the spineless Corbyn administariat to step up to the plate and convincingly remind the ordinary folks of Britain that the people they voted for are those neo-Thatcherites who want to privatise the NHS, remove employment and environmental protections, and drive the economy in a hard capitalist direction.

    You were mugged by your bookmaker. British citizens living abroad were also excluded 5 million. I applied for a postal vote as soon as the referendum was announced only to get an email from Calderdale Council just a week or so before the date to say that they were processing the forms but I was unlikely to receive the papers in time. I made a frantic last-minute push for my sister to submit proxy votes.

    I gather this was not unusual. People had been posting the fact that voting forms would arrive only 5 days before the referendum date. Post from France takes 5 days. There are 1. Most of these people would have voted to remain. Add to this the downright lies fed to the electorate by the Leave campaign and some of the tabloids — Farage admitted the day after the election that the EU money would NOT go to the NHS.

    Many poor souls believed him. We are talking about the future of our country and the people in it and those like me likely to be homeless and jobless should I be forced to come back to the UK. I lived 19 years in paris, and had to get the carte de sejour before Unfortunatly i didnt go for citizenship during those 2 decades in France- my loss now as to get citizenship now would mean having to live in France for 4 years and work — and work there is none in France especially after 40 your chances are zilch. The author does understand that any vote is a snapshot at that point?

    Amen to that Andy both sides had the chance to argue the Case and on many Occasion more time and articles of imaginary Doom were more prolific from the Stay side. The decision has been made and the majority won. But there will always be sour grapes from the losers. Perhaps now they see what the EU wants to charge us to get out and they will realise this may be our last chance…. Democracy is a concept — we then use a variety of processes, electoral systems and laws to run the country. Any result that is seen as unfair by a large numb. The elites need a docile global population and unfettered access to markets to retain their power and treasure.

    There was little or no content highlighting the benefits of being in the EU. Day after day in the run up to the election, remain bombarded the public with warnings of disaster if we were to leave, heads of state, so called impartial civil servants, the president of the USA etc.

    Their campaign was a partial success as I believe that the outcome would have been an even larger majority voting to leave if the remain campaign had not been fed by lies, half-truths, twisted statistics or no statistics at all, manipulation, and an appeal to the lowest common denominator. People fell for the lies, and now the country is screwed because of it. This is well written and argued at a micro-level, but — while I wish the referendum result had been different -its over-arching argument is terrible — patronising and technocratic in exactly the way the various people below say. While useful pointing out some home truths to Brexiteers that they are not exactly an overwhelming majority, this article does a disservice to the pro-European cause.

    Ha ha, quite an amusing spoof, but the graph is a dead giveaway! No academic would in seriousness make such a claim from such a graph, so Adrian Low is clearly being satirical. Tiny fly in the ointment is that the polls before the referendum also showed a majorty for remain. I mean, who wants to take part in a poll on a past event? The most likely participants would be people with a grievance i. This referendum had a very high turnout, was given unavoidable coverage and the result must be accepted.

    The fact his source for the polling is an anti-brexit website rather than a non biased polling website that conveniently misses several pro brexit polls just shows how far academic standards have slipped at the LSE. On the contrary: the article is strong and rigourous. Your objections, on the other hand, speak volumes: feigning an air of intelectual superiority when someone points out that brexit was sold to us on a pack of lies, and will turn this country into an inward-looking irrelevance. So you disagree that under these rules the vote to take us into the EU would be void?

    Or that you can demonstrate how it was somehow harder for remains to vote? No, it is not bluster. The points you make are pretty easy to refute. The overwhelming assumption on the day was that we would vote to remain, so people tired of the process yet who wanted to stay in did not bother to vote. A foolish mistake, and one which distorted the result.

    First year political students are taughtt the folly of such apathy: people who feel strongly about a subject — in case the outists — are moree likelly to go to vote. Haad people realised what was at stake, I daresay more people would have turned out. Thus, far fromh being abstract, these objections are concrete. What an absolutely stupid statement. With respect to the suggestion that I have chosen biased polls, I have not done that, nor am I aware of any evidence of bias from different pollsters. The no2brexit. I have not said that the vote is invalid, it is a democratic vote using the UK rules to administer that vote.

    Why the young vote did not come out has been speculated on by others Financial Times model and I have presented that argument here. It was not based on the graphical entries. I regret not indicating that on the graph and have consequently relabelled the graph on no2brexit.