Unaccountably, this blog has now has had more than 3,500,000 page views, which would seem to prove that the more arcane the topic, the more attention it will attract. Or, at least, that obscurity is not the kiss of death.
I knew this was coming up, and was planning to work up some contest where the first person to comment after 3.5 millions was reached would get a free signed copy of Gobsmacked! The British Invasion of American English, but I was asleep at the switch. (Is that an expression in British English?) So here’s the new plan: I’ll mail a book to someone who comments on this post today with a suggested Not One-Off Britishism that I haven’t yet written about, and that I decide is the best of the day.
Anyway, thanks to the OED, Ngram Viewer, the New York Times, and Jonathon Green’s Encyclopedia of Slang, which make the blog possible. And to readers and, especially, commenters, who keep me going.
notoneoffbritishisms.com 
……….asleep at the switch…? You have me there: I’ve never heard that one at any point either side of the Atlantic.
However, over here we do have an expression that is “asleep at the wheel” – it probably is a nautical-ism and seems to mean the same thing.
As interesting as ever, keep up the good work!
Congratulations!
As suggestions, I thought of the two words “proper fit.” Either might be NOOB worthy. Instead of “proper” AmE would say things like “really, real, true,” etc. And instead of “fit,” AmE would say “in shape, hot, jacked,” and other fun expressions.
Funny you should mention this as I just came upon it yesterday, in a list of “Love Island” Britishisms that are used on the American edition of the show. Definitely a contender.
First of all, congratulations to you Ben, and to all of us who have contributed to that worthy number of views.
I reckon you have semi-covered this concept in other posts, but, thanks to the World Cup, we’re seeing an outbreak of Americans using plural verbs in ways we would not– things like “Mexico have…”
This is not new in US coverage of football/soccer. It is among many other unwelcome intrusions that are– presumably– mistakenly believed to lend “authenticity” to reporting on football/soccer. “Boot” for shoe, “pitch” for field, etc..
I contend, however, that this phenomenon of pairing what Americans consider a single subject with a plural verb has (or is it have?) escaped the confines of the field (not pitch) and broadcast booth and is wandering through American prose in other non-football/soccer writing. Naturally, no examples come to mind right now, but I’ll add them as I see them.
Oh, and I already have the book. 🙂
Have you ever done on/in a sticky wicket?
Sent from my iPhone
That’s a great question, the answer of which is no. I guess the reason is that it’s one of those very old and familiar Britishisms in the U.S., which the stage Englishman is given to say, along with “telly,” “old chap,” and the like. And weven when Americans have used and do used it, it has a self-consciously English feel. But I’ll look into it a bit more, and thanks.