Discussion in 'English Only' started by Alaor Santos, Mar 18, 2011.
Please, what does 'by appointment to her Majesty the Queen' mean, please?
Context, please? appointment to? As it is written it sounds wrong.
This is a formal phrase* that providers of goods or services to the British royal family are entitled to use. It identifies them as a merchant that the Queen and her family have chosen, implying that their products are of the highest quality (or, since they can afford the best, they would have chosen someone else).
In order to get a Royal Warrant, as permission to state that one is "by appointment to ..." is called, the provider must have supplied goods or services to the Queen (or the Duke of Edinburgh, or the Prince of Wales) for at least five of the most recent seven years, including some business within the last 12 months. It is then entitled to apply through the Royal Warrant Holders Association. More information is on their Web site, www.royalwarrant.org.
*With regard to the preceding comment: formal phrases such as this in the U.K. have often been used, without change, for centuries. They therefore may use language that sounds archaic, even odd, to modern ears. It is correct exactly as given.
If you are talking about product labels, ...."basically, it means that the company carrying the 'by appointment' notice is allowed to call itself an official supplier of goods or services to the Queen (or the palace) and can thus display her coat of arms on the signage."
Now the wording to her Majesty the Queen makes more sense to me.
Also worth quickly adding that most (if not all) of the products with this label on tend to be of British creation. I doubt it's a coincidence but whether it's just that the Royal Family happen to prefer that brand over another can't be dismissed.
Companies such as Cadbury's have it and Cadbury's is a VERY long-standing British chocolate company. I have a feeling that maybe Marmite is one as well but, certainly, most of the brands I've seen with this label have been British.
Thought I'd just contribute - might be useful, might not.
It stands to reason that the royal family would tend to choose British products, because of both availability and national pride/image.
But she's my queen, too, as she is in fifteen other Commonwealth realms! I do agree that availability plays a major role in choosing royal purveyors. A quick scan of the list of Royal Warrant holders of the British Royal Family resulted in two Canadian companies (although one warrant was withdrawn) and one American. Mind you, these are multinational companies that would have stores or merchandise readily available in the UK. Royal warrants are also given out by other royal courts.
After looking at that list, I realised that I only recognise a minority of brands but from what you said, it certainly seems biased to the point of just being unfair.
Also, the Carphone Warehouse has a royal warrant?! What?! The Carphone Warehouse!!! I think I need to take a closer look at this list.
(Thanks for linking the list, by the way, because now I can scroll down and recoil in horror at the brands on it.)
Ford and Coca-Cola are up there, though. S'pose that's something. Also, turns out I was wrong about Marmite (which doesn't have a royal warrant). So, the Royal Family doesn't like Marmite but they like Martini and Rossi? Oh dear.
Separate names with a comma.