I learned something today.
Stop. No Laughing.
I am attempting to familiarize myself with more British slang before our family makes the big leap o'er the waters- just to keep from completely humiliating ourselves. It's just one of those things I'm doing for fun to keep myself amused and also to stay motivated when I'm bogged down in the hows and whys of constant fundraising. This morning, completely by chance, I stumbled across an article on the difference between pants and trousers.
It seems that we Americans call the thingies that cover our legs from waist to ankles "pants" and the British refer to them as "trousers." Now this wouldn't be so bad, except for the fact that the thingies that Americans prefer to call "underwear" is what the Brits refer to as "pants."
And all this time I thought the word was knickers.
This could very well lead to some troubling moments for our family.
Quite a few years ago, we were all settled in front of the tv, dutifully watching some family entertainment, when some character, on some show (don't ask, we don't remember) uttered the historic phrase, "Where in the heck are your pants?" We liked it so much that we insert that line into household conversation whenever we possibly can.
It may have lost it's appeal within the normal passing of time except for the fact that dear Cricket absolutely cannot stand to be fully clothed. I find him shirtless daily, before noon. As the day wears on, he loses the "trousers" as well. I've learned to cope with this phenomenon by buying him the most voluminous underwear on the market. He secretly rebells being fully clothed in public by leaving the house sans underwear on alarmingly frequent occaisions. I have some concerns that one day he will become a nudist.
So you see, we frequently have the opportunity to use the phrase in differing variations. Now what happens when we get to London, and Cricket invariably does what Cricket does, and someone hears Rooster yell, "Cricket! Where in the heck are your pants?"
Photo courtesy of Fons Reijsbergen.