upworthy
Pop Culture

Video does a perfect job of showing how American English sounds to non-English speakers

You'll never hear the language the same again.

english, american english, how english sounds

Karl Eccleston and Fiona Pepper star in "Skwerl."

If you are a native English speaker, it is probably hard to imagine what people who don’t speak the language hear when you are talking. “Skwerl,” a short film by Karl Eccleston and Brian Fairbairn, attempts to demonstrate what English sounds like to people who don’t speak the language.

The film was created in 2011 for Kino Sydney, “a monthly open-mic night for filmmakers” based in Sydney, Australia. Since being posted to YouTube 12 years ago, it has received over 52 million views.

The short film stars Eccleston and Australian actress Fiona Pepper as a couple whose special evening is disrupted when underlying relationship tensions creep up.

Warning: Strong language

Here's a sample of the script:

THE MAN

So I ran to yourk around the wash today.

THE WOMAN

Oh?

THE MAN

Yeah. That doll's areen blunderface. Can berave that mory alpen john. Joo flan by the long blatt call?

THE WOMAN

Yeah. I coon by the mex areen. Oh you bleed that pribadium by the ronfort line today?

The video received some thoughtful reactions in the comments section. The SkyWolfie6655 summed it up perfectly: “As an English speaker, it feels like I SHOULD be understanding this and I'm just not, like I've heard them wrong or something, this is really well done.”

The film also connected with people who learned English as a second language. “Man, that's exactly what I used to hear when I was younger, before learning English properly. This is actually quite nostalgic,” another wrote.

The video also is an excellent example of what people with a disability may hear even if they speak the language. “This is kind of what it feels like to have auditory processing disorder,” HorseFace1044 wrote. “It's super frustrating because you can almost get what the person is saying, but not quite enough to understand what in the world they are talking about.”


This article originally appeared two years ago.

Elya/Wikimedia Commons

Should you hang the toilet paper roll over or under?

Humans have debated things large and small over the millennia, from democracy to breastfeeding in public to how often people ought to wash their sheets. But perhaps the most silly-yet-surprisingly heated household debate is the one in which we argue over which way to hang the toilet paper roll.

The "over or under" question has plagued marriages and casual acquaintances alike for over 100 years, with both sides convinced they have the soundest reasoning for putting their toilet paper loose end out or loose end under. Some people feel so strongly about right vs. wrong TP hanging that they will even flip the roll over when they go to the bathroom in the homes of strangers.

Contrary to popular belief, it's not merely an inconsequential preference. According to health experts and the man who invented the toilet paper roll, there is actually a "correct" way to hang toilet paper.

What is the correct way to hang a roll of toilet paper?

First, let's be clear about what we're even talking about here with a visual. In the image below, left is "over" and right is "under."

toilet paper, bathrooms, over or under, toilet roll, bathroom etiquetteToilet paper hung "over" (left) and "under" (right)Elya/Wikimedia Commons


So which one is the right way? According to health experts, "over" is the way to go.

"One key to maintaining a hygienic washroom is minimising contact between people and surfaces," Dr. Christian Moro, associate professor of health sciences and medicine at Bond University on Australia's Gold Coast, told Australian Broadcasting Corporation. "Depending on the type of roll holder, [hanging the toilet paper "over"] often lowers the chance that a user will touch the wall behind when fishing for paper, leaving germs behind on that surface which can be spread to the next user."

Picture it: Grabbing the end of the toilet paper when it's hung "over" means you only touch the part of the toilet paper you're going to use. When it's "under," you sometimes have to fish for it or scrape your fingers on the wall in order to grab the loose end. In addition to whatever might be on people's hands already, think about all the people who wipe twice, potentially transferring fresh fecal matter or other bacteria to the wall on the second pass, which then get picked up by other people who inadvertently touch that wall when trying to grab their TP.

Theoretically, we all should have become better hand washers during the pandemic, scrubbing with soap for the full 20 seconds it takes to remove bacteria. But I wouldn't be willing to bet on it.

toilet paper, empty toilet paper roll, batthroom, bathroom etiquette, over or underEmpty toilet paper roll.via Canva/Photos

And touching any surface in a bathroom is pretty nasty, according to a study from the University of Colorado. As Inc. reported: "Using a high-tech genetic sequencing tool, researchers identified 19 groups of bacteria on the doors, floors, faucet handles, soap dispensers, and toilets of 12 public restrooms in Colorado — six men’s restrooms and six women’s restrooms. Many of the bacteria strains identified could be transmitted by touching contaminated surfaces."

Bacteria means things like e.coli, which is a common source of food poisoning and one of the most common bacteria found on bathroom surfaces in the study. If you've ever had a bout of food poisoning, I'm sure you'll agree that a toilet paper roll hanging preference isn't worth risking it.

But sanitary health concerns aren't the only argument for the "over" camp. After all, the original patent for the toilet paper roll, issued in 1891, clearly shows the TP in the "over" position. Thank you for the clarity right from the get go, Mr. Wheeler.

toilet paper, bathrooms, over or under, toilet roll, bathroom etiquetteThe toilet paper roll was patented by Seth Wheeler in 1891.Public Domain


In Wheeler's patent, the perforated toilet paper hangs on a roll in the "over" position. In the words of the patent, the sheets of TP are “partially separated, having their points of attachment arranged in a novel manner, whereby each sheet will easily separate from the series as it is drawn from the roll, there being no litter occasioned, and any waste of paper is thereby prevented.”

Now, before the "under" folks come running with their pitchforks, there are some understandable exceptions to the "over" rule. Namely: cats and kids.

If you have a furry friend or a tiny toddler who likes to unroll the toilet paper roll, "over" makes it super fun for them, while "under" stops them in their tracks. For many people, cats and kids are the primary motivator of their TP hanging habits.

That doesn't change the fact that "over" is actually the "correct" way to hang toilet paper according to health science and the inventor's intention, of course, but "under" is certainly preferable to having a pile of TP on the floor.

Now go forth, do that with information as you will, and try to make peace with your over vs. under rivals.

This article originally appeared last year.

Wikpedia, Instagram, Canva

Thom Yorke posts a statement.

In October of 2024, Radiohead front man Thom Yorke was crooning his electric songs in dreamy blue and pink light on-stage in Melbourne, Australia, when a man from the crowd began screaming about war. "Do you condemn the Israeli genocide of Gaza? Already 200,000, half of them children," he yelled.

Thom pauses, then responds, "Come up here and say that. Don't stand there like a coward; come here and say it."

Many in the crowd scream for Thom to ignore the heckler, though some pile on. He continues, "You want to piss on everybody’s night? OK, you do it, see you later," and then leaves the stage. He returns soon after the crowd chants his name and sings Radiohead's "Karma Police," met with exhilaration.

-Thom Yorke on stagewww.youtube.com, CNN

In a piece about the incident for NBC News, Patrick Smith notes, "Radiohead has faced criticism in the past for playing gigs in Israel and not joining a boycott of the country by some artists." Smith also shares a statement Yorke made in 2017 at a concert in Tel Aviv: "We don’t endorse Netanyahu any more than Trump, but we still play in America. Music, art and academia is about crossing borders, not building them."

Unfortunately, those border walls have only gotten higher in the divide between human beings, as of late. The art of nuance, historical context, and listening to one another has somehow been lost among the memes and soundbites.

Yorke has now made a lengthy, thoughtful statement which he released on Instagram in order to, as he writes, "fill in the blanks" and to address the constant online (and in-person) bullying.

He begins his note, referencing what happened at the show: "Some guy shouting at me from the dark last year when I was picking up a guitar to sing the final song alone in front of 9000 people in Melbourne didn’t really seem like the best moment to discuss the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.”

He shares that his silence following the incident has allowed people to put words in his mouth. "My attempt to show respect for all those who are suffering, and those who have died, and to not trivialize it in a few words has allowed other opportunistic groups to use intimidation and defamation to fill in the blanks."

Yorke is now ready to make sure there are no gaps in his beliefs. He writes, "I think Netanyahu and his crew of extremists are totally out of control and need to be stopped, and that the international community should put all the pressure it can on them to cease."

But he notes this is not a one-sided conflict. "At the same time, the unquestioning Free Palestine refrain that surrounds us does not answer the simple question of why the hostages have still not all been returned? For what possible reason? Why did Hamas choose the truly horrific acts of October 7th? The answer seems obvious, and I believe Hamas chooses too to hide behind the suffering of its people, in an equally cynical fashion for their own purposes.”

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

He then addresses the polarization happening due to the easy spread of misinformation on social media. "Social media witch-hunts (nothing new) on either side, pressurizing artists and whoever they feel like that week to make statements, etc., do very little except heighten tension, fear, and over-simplification of what are complex problems that merit proper face-to-face debate by people who genuinely wish the killing to stop and an understanding to be found.

This kind of deliberate polarization does not serve our fellow human beings and perpetuates a constant ‘us and them’ mentality. It destroys hope and maintains a sense of isolation, the very things that extremists use to maintain their position. We facilitate their hiding in plain sight if we assume that the extremists and the people they claim to represent are one and the same, indivisible."

Yorke makes it clear that he understands the helplessness that many feel when watching the news coverage of today's world. "I sympathize completely with the desire to ‘do something’ when we are witnessing such horrific suffering on our devices every day. It completely makes sense. But I now think it is a dangerous illusion to believe reposting, or one or two line messages are meaningful, especially if it is to condemn your fellow human beings. There are unintended consequences."

But he warns that keyboard justice warriors dehumanize one another. "It is shouting from the darkness. It is not looking people in the eye when you speak. It is making dangerous assumptions. It is not debate and it is not critical thinking."

He later ends with an acknowledgement that he won't be able to please everyone. "I am sure that, to this point, what I have written here will in no way satisfy those who choose to target myself or those I work with, they will spend time picking holes and looking for reasons to continue, we are an opportunity not to be missed, no doubt, and by either side.

I have written this in the simple hope that I can join with the many millions of others praying for this suffering, isolation and death to stop, praying that we can collectively regain our humanity and dignity and our ability to reach understanding… that one day soon this darkness will have passed."

On the subreddit r/Radiohead, there are already thousands of comments. One person asks, "This parasocial obsession with making celebrities take sides on political issues is so weird. Why aren't they allowed to have privacy for their own beliefs?"

Another answers, "Because some people want the celebrities to tell them what to think. Not having a definitive answer is a discomfort too hard to bear for them. They feel entitled to have the answer now because their identity is entwined with the celebrities. They don't want to feel the disappointment that these celebrities are just humans who don't think exactly like they do."

This Redditor discusses how complicated the history of the world is, and questions why Thom Yorke (and other celebrities) seem forced into commenting about events of which they are not experts: "The reality is this is a hundred-year-long conflict with a deep and complicated history.

There's no simple black-and-white answer of "Palestine good, Israel bad." Obviously Israel should not indiscriminately kill civilians, but they also cannot allow Hamas to terrorize their population.

I still have no clue what people hoped to accomplish by making Thom say something about it. He's neither an expert nor an especially influential person in this sphere. Other than making you feel good that your favorite musician agrees with your political stance... what does this accomplish?"

In a more hopeful message, this commenter says: "His music says a lot but the direct words in this message are also beautiful, thoughtful, and reinforcing. Thank you Thom. Much respect."



A man and two women having a fun conversation.

Babbel's Biggest Sale of the Year: Get 65% off for Memorial Day!


There’s no one alive who doesn’t feel some anxiety about making small talk with other people. The difference is that some confront their fears because they know the incredible benefits that it can mean for their social life, romantic prospects, and careers, while some shy away and miss out on many opportunities.

Many people who avoid small talk believe those who excel at it are naturally charismatic or have been blessed with the “gift of gab.” However, many great conversationalists honed their skills and have a set of rules, techniques, and strategies they use when speaking to people, just like how people who do improvisational comedy or acting have a set of rules to follow to put everyone on the same page. Confident, sociable people may make engaging with others look effortless, but that’s because they have a strategy.

conversation, fun office, men and woman, funny conversation, jokes, levityA group of coworkers having a laugh.via Canva/Photos

What is the 30-second rule?

New York Times bestselling author and founder of the Maxwell Institute, John C. Maxwell, had a rule whenever he started a conversation: “Within the first 30 seconds of a conversation, say something encouraging to a person.” This can work in any social or professional situation, for example:

At work:

“Wendy, I heard you did great on yesterday’s conference call.”

“Frank, I hear the clients really love working with you.”

At a party:

“Mohammed, I really loved those pictures you posted on Instagram on your trip to Mexico.”

“Sang, are we going to get some of your incredible barbecue today?”

On a date:

“Thanks for choosing such a great restaurant, it has such a nice ambiance.”

“I really like the way your necklace brings out your eyes.”

date, conversation, laughs, jokes, salads, dinner, restaurant, cafeA man and woman joking on a date.via Canva/Photos

Whether you are complimenting, relaying positive information about the person, or encouraging them, the key is to pump them up and make them feel good about themselves. The 30-second rule fits nicely into Maxwell’s overall view of relationships: “Those who add to us, draw us to them. Those who subtract, cause us to withdraw,” he said.

The key to giving the other person encouragement is to do so genuinely. If you aren’t genuine with your compliments or words of encouragement, your words can have the opposite effect and make the other person feel like you are being condescending.

How does encouragement make people feel?

encouragement, poeple in blue shirts, luaghs, my bad, smiles, supportive peopleA man making a joke with other people in blue shirts.via Canva/Photos

Studies have shown that when people hear words of encouragement, they feel good and have a burst of energy. Psychologist Henry H. Goddard studied tired children and found that they had a burst of energy when he said something encouraging to them. But when he said something negative, they became even more tired.

Ultimately, a direct connection exists between being likeable and being genuinely interested in other people. William King said, “A gossip is one who talks to you about other people. A bore is one who talks to you about himself. And a brilliant conversationalist is one who talks to you about yourself.”

Every time you start a new conversation with someone, take the opportunity to share some words of encouragement with the other person, and you’ll be on your way to being seen as a brilliant conversationalist.

Canva

Two nuns dance in a church.

Sometimes, you've just gotta get up and groove. For Brazilian nuns Sister Marizele Cassiano and Sister Marisa de Paula, well, they make a habit of it. Most recently, as representatives of the Copiosa Redenção congregation, they made an appearance on the Family of Love show on the Pai Eterno (translation: Eternal Father) Catholic TV network to discuss and promote a Brazilian vocation retreat.

@abcnews

Two Brazilian nuns have gone viral after dropping an impromptu beatbox and dance session during a Catholic television program.#abcnews #news

NBC LA via AP News shares that after a song was brought up about their religious calling, the duo "stood up and launched into a routine complete with singing, beatbox, and dance moves."

Both are dressed in blue skirts and white shirts with crosses dangling from their necks. Sister Cassiano earnestly holds the microphone close to her mouth as she begins singing. Sister de Paula immediately starts dancing, seemingly feeling the spirit in her core. But it's not until the beat-boxing begins that Sister de Paula busts out dance moves not unlike *NSync in their prime. The joy can be felt energetically spreading from the stage (where we hear supportive laughter) to the audience to the Internet.

If that wasn't all exciting enough, the host of the show, Deacon Giovani Bastos, even joined in "matching Sister de Paula’s moves in a performance that's now been seen by millions on social media in Brazil and abroad."

Sister Cassiano told the Associated Press, “That moment was very spontaneous, because with Sister Marisa, if you start a beat, she will dance. And I’m used to singing, to beatboxing, so for us it was very simple, spontaneous and at the same time very surprising to see that it went viral even outside Brazil."

She added, “Beatboxing, dancing, and the songs themselves, are tools that God uses to reach the hearts of the people we work with. And it works! It’s beautiful to see."

Both Sisters have focused their work on youth who struggle with addiction and direction in life. They strongly believe that "music has been a powerful tool to help those in need." CBS 8 reports that, "The sisters also work as vocation promoters, organizing retreats for women interested in pursuing a religious career."

The comments under the ABC News TikTok page were on fire. One viewer joked, "One month in with an American Pope and we got nuns beatboxing. Immaculate."

Another claimed, "I can't stop watching this video. I love the dancing sister and the little hand gesture before the beat drops gets me every time."

Another added that one doesn't have to be Catholic or live in Brazil to appreciate the joy: "Am I religious or Catholic in any way? Nope. Do I understand the words? Nope. Have I been walking around my house singing this all day? YUP!!!"

On Facebook, a few people note that the dancing nuns are "way better than the infamous Olympic break-dancer." (They are referring to Raygun who has since retired after her controversial appearance in the Paris Olympics.)

Another suggests their break-dancing crew be called "Nun of yo business," which frankly has a nice ring to it.

nuns, dancing, grooving, Catholic church, Whoopie GoldbergNun dancing in the film Sister ActGiphy Touchstone Oictures

And of course this comment had to be made: "If they're doing a Sister Act 3, these nuns need to have a cameo."



Pop Culture

This seemingly simple question stumped all three Final Jeopardy contestants in 1984

It was only Alex Trebek's second day on the job when all three contestants gave the same wrong answer and all ended up with $0 .

"Jeopardy!" is one of the most popular trivia shows in the world.

The popular game show "Jeopardy!" originated in 1964, and for six decades it has stumped contestants and viewers with tough trivia questions and answers (or answers and questions, to be more accurate). Competing on "Jeopardy!" is practically synonymous with being a smartypants, and champions win lifelong bragging rights along with whatever monetary winnings they end up taking home.

To win "Jeopardy!," you place a wager in the Final Jeopardy round with whatever money you've collected through the first two rounds. All three contestants write down their wagers based solely on the category given, then they have 30 seconds to write down the question for the same answer after it's revealed. Very rarely do all three contestants get the Final Jeopardy wrong.

But in 1984, on Alex Trebek's second day hosting the show, a deceptively simple Final Jeopardy answer answer resulted in all three contestants making the same wrong guess and ending the round with $0 each.

The category was "The Calendar," and after the contestants placed their bets, the answer was revealed: "Calendar date with which the 20th century began."

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

The 20th century was the 1900s, as most of us are aware, and all three contestants wrote down identical responses: "What is January 1, 1900?" But they were all incorrect. And unfortunately, all three had wagered their entire amount, leaving them with nothing across the board.

"Oh, I don't believe it!" exclaimed one of the contestants as they all laughed at the absurdity. "I'm at a loss for words," said Trebek.

A member of the audience asked what the correct answer–or question— was, and Trebek shared that the correct response would have been "What is January 1, 1901?"

If that seems confusing, it's probably because we all made a huge deal about the year 2000, marking it as the end of the 21st century as well as the turn of the millennium. But basically, we were wrong. Some people did point it out at the time, but the excitement and momentum of celebrating Y2K had us all in a frenzy and no one was going to wait until January 1, 2001 to celebrate the new millennium.

Why should we have? It all comes down to the fact that in the Gregorian calendar, the first year wasn't 0 A.D., it was 1 A.D. The first century spanned from 1 to 100 A.D., the second century from 101 to 200 A.D. and so on, leading up to the 20th century officially being from 1901 to 2000. So January 1, 1901 is actually the date that the 20th century began, despite how unintuitive it feels.

To be fair, you'd think a "Jeopardy!" contestant might recognize that the question seemed awfully simple for a Final Jeopardy round, but only having 30 seconds to think under pressure is tough. And it's not like these people lived in the internet era where random trivia questions like this regularly go viral, making us more aware of them. And this episode aired over a decade before the "Seinfeld" episode where Jerry explains the "no year zero" thing to Newman, who had planned a millennium party.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

As one person pointed out, the calendar answer is technically correct, but it's not the way the average person thinks of centuries, just as a tomato is technically fruit but the average person thinks of it (and uses it) as a vegetable. Even though there were some sticklers about the year 2000, most of us just went along with seeing it as the turn of the millennium because it felt like that's how it should be. It's kind of wild how most of us can think of something incorrectly but we just sort of collectively accept our wrongness about it.

The 1984 episode making a viral comeback also people to share how much they missed Alex Trebek. The beloved, long-time "Jeopardy!" host died in 2020 at age 80 after a 20-month battle with pancreatic cancer. He worked up until the point where he couldn't anymore, even while undergoing chemotherapy. His final episode included a touching tribute honoring his 37 seasons with the game show, the end of an illustrious and iconic era.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Back in 2023, Ken Jennings, former "Jeopardy" champion, with the record for the longest winning streak, took over as sole host of the show, after previously rotating as host with Mayim Bialik.

This article originally appeared last year.

OSZAR »