Moving House.
Our take
In the delightful labyrinth of language, few phrases are as charmingly convoluted as "to move house." Ben Yagoda, in his latest exploration on Not One-Off Britishisms, sheds light on this quintessentially British term that’s gradually making its way across the pond, much like an unexpected but welcome visitor. While Americans simply say "to move," the British expression evokes a certain domesticity, a sense of transition that is both physical and emotional. This subtle linguistic shift is not just about semantics; it taps into the very essence of our relationship with home and the act of relocating. It beckons us to consider how language shapes our understanding of experiences, much like the inquiries posed in pieces like Is fully understanding movies in your TL one of the endbosses of language learning? and Which of these two types of cards is better for language learning?.
The phrase "to move house" conjures images beyond mere logistics. It encapsulates the emotional weight of uprooting oneself from a familiar sanctuary—walls that have cradled laughter, tears, and countless memories. When we consider the Proto-Germanic roots of “house,” which relate to the idea of hiding and shelter, we realize this term speaks to our primal need for safety. This broader understanding of language and its etymological connections enriches our appreciation for the nuances of communication. After all, to "move house" suggests not just a physical relocation but a metamorphosis, a shedding of the old to make way for the new. In this sense, the expression serves as a reminder of the emotional landscape that accompanies such transitions.
Moreover, the adoption of this phrase in American English signifies a cultural exchange that is increasingly prevalent in our globalized world. Language is not static; it evolves, bends, and breaks boundaries. The rise of British expressions in American vernacular reflects a deeper intertwining of cultures, particularly as media consumption blurs the lines of regional dialects. As we consume British television, music, and literature, we find ourselves absorbing not just words but an entire worldview—a delightful mess of accents, idioms, and cultural references. Just as Yagoda notes the rarity of addressing "to move house” in his blog, we must consider the importance of these linguistic shifts and what they reveal about our collective identity.
This linguistic evolution also prompts a reflection on how we engage with language learning. As discussed in Rant: Language Content Creators with Disingenuous Reels, the modern landscape of language instruction is rife with trends that may dilute the richness of authentic communication. The global mingling of terms like "to move house" serves as an invitation for learners to dive deeper, to not just memorize phrases but to understand the cultural essences they carry.
Looking ahead, one must wonder: What other Britishisms will find their way into everyday American speech? As we navigate this ever-changing linguistic landscape, let’s remain curious and attentive, peering beneath the surface. After all, language is a living entity, one that squirts water at our assumptions and dares us to explore its depths. So, the next time you hear someone say "to move house," embrace it—let it burrow into your understanding of home, transition, and the beautiful messiness of language itself. Stay spooty!
Ben Yagoda at Not One-Off Britishisms discusses a phrase I was familiar with but didn’t realize was making inroads over here:
I see that only once in the history of Not One-Off Britishisms have I addressed the expression “to move house,” which is the British equivalent of what Americans mean when they say, “to move.” It was back in 2011, the first year of the blog, and I recounted, in passing, “the thrill of seeing,” in a New Yorker Janet Malcolm piece about Gertrude Stein, published eight years earlier, a sentence that began, ‘She and [Alice B.] Toklas were about to move house from Bilignin to a manor in Culoz, a few miles away…’”
I didn’t mention that the first time I ever encountered the expression also had a New Yorker connection. It was in 1996 or so, and I was interviewing Tina Brown, the magazine’s editor in chief (who is British, as Janet Malcolm is not), and she said something about “moving house.” I had not yet devised the concept of NOOBs, but the expression was so striking and different that I filed it away in the recesses of my consciousness.
The OED‘s first two citations for the phrase were both written by Thomas Hardy, the first in an 1888 short story called “Waiting Supper”: “Side by side as they had lived in his day here were they now. They had moved house in mass.” (Incidentally, the OED defines the word “wait,” as Hardy used it in the story’s title, as “To postpone (a meal) in expectation of the arrival of someone. colloquial.” It has four citations, all English, from 1788 to 1861. From an 1836 Charles Dickens letter: “I hope and trust you did not wait dinner for me.” The only time I’ve ever encountered it, till now, is from my wife, born in Massachusetts, where a lot of Britishisms, like “rubbish,” linger.)
But “move house” had been in circulation for at least three decades before Hardy’s story–probably well over three decades.
Click through for the antedates (which are always fun); I normally have no objection to Yanks picking up shiny bits of Britspeak, but this one is (in my opinion) dumb: “moving” is short and punchy, “moving house” is long and dull.
Read on the original site
Open the publisher's page for the full experience