Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2010 July 30

= July 30 =

'...earned his ouster'
Whilst reading this article - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703578104575397112531374230.html?mod=e2tw - I was struck by the phrase "....earned his ouster". I know what it means, by the context, that's fine. But even to these British ears with knowledge of Americanisms over my 30 years on the planet, this is a new one on me! How common is it? Is this phrase regional or a national term? doktorb wordsdeeds 07:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not "earned" in the article, it's "forced". I'm British and I've come across the word "ouster" a few times in American English, most usually in Time magazine and suchlike – it's certainly one of those words that seems to come up in journalism more than anywhere else.  It's merely the AmEng equivalent of "ousting". --Viennese Waltz talk 08:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * To an American, it is a standard use of the language. Is "whilst" a regionalism or a national term?  Marco polo (talk) 23:01, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * National. 86.164.66.83 (talk) 23:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I get to link to one of the more useful sites for calm understanding of each other: http://separatedbyacommonlanguage.blogspot.com/2006/06/whilst.html 86.164.66.83 (talk) 23:26, 30 July 2010 (UTC)