British spellings in the US (or why color/colour?)

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-06 07:56pm

HemlockGrey wrote:I use 'grey' and have been known to speak of a 'flat'. That's about it.

The British language holds all sorts of nasty suprises. Like 'black pudding' which may not be black but is definetly not a pudding. -shudder-

Same goes for Yorkshire pudding, but I actually like Yorkshire pudding, despite it's being a pastry, not a pudding.

Yorkshire pudding + gravy + roast = 0WNAG3!

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-06 08:04pm

In Canada, we use British spelling but we also use American terms. There is no contradiction and it is not an affectation. As shocking as this may seem to some of you, there are English-speaking nations out there besides America and Britain.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-06 08:08pm

Darth Wong wrote:In Canada, we use British spelling but we also use American terms. There is no contradiction and it is not an affectation. As shocking as this may seem to some of you, there are English-speaking nations out there besides America and Britain.

*Gasp*

You're kidding?

I reckon most Canadians don't want to spell the American way out of sheer spite. But a lot of non-English speaking nations spell the American way when using English, probably through overexposure to the American industry etc.

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-02-06 08:14pm

Darth Wong wrote:In Canada, we use British spelling but we also use American terms. There is no contradiction and it is not an affectation. As shocking as this may seem to some of you, there are English-speaking nations out there besides America and Britain.

I never said it was affectation for Canadians to spell that way Mike. Being part of the British commonwealth, I would expect you to be more heavily influenced by British English than we are. It is, however, an affectation when Americans do it.

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2003-02-06 09:01pm

JediNeophyte wrote:Same with lieutenant. I've heard it pronounced "lef-ten-ant". WTF!? How do you get "lef" out of "lieu"? Of course, we do use "colonel", so I shouldn't complain here.

IIRC, lieutenant is a French word. Maybe the Brits just decided to bastardize it out of spite for the Froggies.

Can't say I blame 'em.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:9/11/01 instead of 11/9/01.

Back in the days of old, Americans would have called today's date February the 6th, in the year of our Lord 2003. The Brits would have used the 6th of February, in the year of our Lord 2003. Just a difference in preference. It didn't really matter until we started using the numerical shortened date above, which screwed up everything.

I used 2/6/03 until I went to work for an international company. I switched to 6 Feb 2003 for documents I was sending around the world so that I wouldn't confuse anybody. I've stuck with it ever since.

Sonnenburg · Post by **Sonnenburg** » 2003-02-06 09:23pm

I worked on two contracts for the MoD from August of '01 to May of '02, and because of overtime I ate, slept and breathed British writing styles. I don't recognize the differences any more, and I don't think about it. Nor should it really matter.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-06 09:56pm

Perinquus wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:In Canada, we use British spelling but we also use American terms. There is no contradiction and it is not an affectation. As shocking as this may seem to some of you, there are English-speaking nations out there besides America and Britain.
I never said it was affectation for Canadians to spell that way Mike. Being part of the British commonwealth, I would expect you to be more heavily influenced by British English than we are.

OK. I must have misinterpreted you, then.

It is, however, an affectation when Americans do it.

Since they were presumably taught American spelling in school, I suppose one could make that claim. On the other hand, if they've read a lot of English literature, it would be quite understandable for them to adopt English spelling.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » 2003-02-06 10:02pm

British spelling is, if you think of it, French.

The me on the end of programme, for example, is French.

Blame it on the Vikings who lived in France for 80 years, the Normans.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-02-06 10:14pm

As a Canadian I happen to mix and match spellings the same way I do with Imperial and Metric measures. I even spell the same word differently, but usually not in the same paper or message. Words such as centre/center, metre/meter where the only difference is letter order get mangled pretty bad by my whacked dialect of English, and they get used interchangeably depending on mood, day of week, etc.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » 2003-02-06 10:19pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:Yorkshire pudding + gravy + roast = 0WNAG3!

When I was in York this summer, had a dinner in a pub there.

The floor had about a 10 degree list, walls were not straight, nor was the ceiling an equal height off the floor all round.

Had a great Yorkshire pud' though. A HUGE pud, 'bout the size of the plate, 2-3" deep, filled literally with gravy. In the pool of gravy was 4 slices of roast beef. Man that was heaven.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-02-07 11:18am

Yprkshire pudding is a pudding!
So is black pudding or steak and kidney pudding.
They're just not sweet!

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-02-07 03:26pm

innerbrat wrote:Yprkshire pudding is a pudding!
So is black pudding or steak and kidney pudding.
They're just not sweet!

dont confuse the poor people....

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-07 03:50pm

Ted wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:Yorkshire pudding + gravy + roast = 0WNAG3!
When I was in York this summer, had a dinner in a pub there.

The floor had about a 10 degree list, walls were not straight, nor was the ceiling an equal height off the floor all round.

Had a great Yorkshire pud' though. A HUGE pud, 'bout the size of the plate, 2-3" deep, filled literally with gravy. In the pool of gravy was 4 slices of roast beef. Man that was heaven.

York is an old city, I think the numerous tyrants that lived there coupled with the dragon invasion of 1184 and the fact that LANCASHIRE BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF THEM. Ahem. Means they can't build right. I also hear they are all inbred farmer people who have become hermaphrodites...

Antie · Post by **Antie** » 2003-02-07 04:02pm

It's an appeal to standard practice. Element names end in ium. What makes aluminium so special? Never, EVER seen it spelt without the second i.

Incidentally, there is a character in the Japanese anime and manga series Bishôjo Senshi Sêrâ Mûn named Sailor Aluminum Seirên. (Seirên is the ancient Greek form of the term siren from mythology.) The Japanese use the Roman letters "Aluminium" more often than "Aluminum" (if they aren't approximating the words in their katakana characters). However, Naoko Takeuchi (the creator of Sailor Aluminum Seirên) had the "Aluminum" spelling in mind, not the "Aluminium" one.

Antie · Post by **Antie** » 2003-02-07 04:10pm

This site uses the wrong katakana characters for aruminiumu:

http://www.vanderkrogt.net/elements/elem/al.html

They should have written this:

Ted · Post by **Ted** » 2003-02-07 04:18pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:York is an old city, I think the numerous tyrants that lived there coupled with the dragon invasion of 1184 and the fact that LANCASHIRE BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF THEM. Ahem. Means they can't build right. I also hear they are all inbred farmer people who have become hermaphrodites...

Well, Guy Fawkes came from York, plus its got the National Railway Museum there, so it aint all bad.

Plus, it's legal for an Englishman to shoot a Scotsman with a bow and arrow on Sundays!

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2003-02-07 05:48pm

What about sticking vowels next to other vowels where they clearly do not belong: encyclopaedia, aeon, etc?

Writing dates numerically is just like writing the whole thing out: September 11th, 2001, thus 9/11/01. (Saying "The eleventh of September" is passive voice, and therefore wimpy.)

And pudding is a dessert with a gooey consistency, not some sort of meat, dammit!

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-02-07 06:11pm

Andrew J. wrote:What about sticking vowels next to other vowels where they clearly do not belong: encyclopaedia, aeon, etc?

That's just a retention of the Latin spelling, which is growing increasingly archaic. And I believe the Romans themselves borrowed those words from the Greeks. In any case, those extra vowels (a in these two words) did serve a purpose in Latin. We have a lot of Lating borrowings in English, and in nearly all cases, we have retained the original spelling and altered the pronunciation slightly. I find this mildly curious, since the Romance languages which are direct descendants of Latin have altered the spelling of Latin words, even proper names (e.g. in modern Italian IVLIVS CAESAR becomes Giulio Cesare) to a far greater extent than our Germanic English language has.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-07 06:39pm

Andrew J. wrote:What about sticking vowels next to other vowels where they clearly do not belong: encyclopaedia, aeon, etc?

Writing dates numerically is just like writing the whole thing out: September 11th, 2001, thus 9/11/01. (Saying "The eleventh of September" is passive voice, and therefore wimpy.)

And pudding is a dessert with a gooey consistency, not some sort of meat, dammit!

Why not go the whole hog and speak l33t liek Jeff K?

R u afraid ull luk sily??!?!?

The English language is as it is because it was made that way for hundreds of years. Hell, why not go back to pure phonetic spelling again where any word that sounds the same can be spelt different in one sentence at least twice. People did it all the time.

English is officially spelt the way it is, deal with it.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2003-02-07 08:10pm

Ted wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:York is an old city, I think the numerous tyrants that lived there coupled with the dragon invasion of 1184 and the fact that LANCASHIRE BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF THEM. Ahem. Means they can't build right. I also hear they are all inbred farmer people who have become hermaphrodites...
Well, Guy Fawkes came from York, plus its got the National Railway Museum there, so it aint all bad.

Plus, it's legal for an Englishman to shoot a Scotsman with a bow and arrow on Sundays!

Now that's an interesting form of weekend entertainment...

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-07 08:18pm

kheegan wrote:
Ted wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:York is an old city, I think the numerous tyrants that lived there coupled with the dragon invasion of 1184 and the fact that LANCASHIRE BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF THEM. Ahem. Means they can't build right. I also hear they are all inbred farmer people who have become hermaphrodites...
Well, Guy Fawkes came from York, plus its got the National Railway Museum there, so it aint all bad.

Plus, it's legal for an Englishman to shoot a Scotsman with a bow and arrow on Sundays!
Now that's an interesting form of weekend entertainment...

The hasn't been repealed so it's legit.

*Grabs longbow*

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2003-02-07 08:47pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Andrew J. wrote:What about sticking vowels next to other vowels where they clearly do not belong: encyclopaedia, aeon, etc?

Writing dates numerically is just like writing the whole thing out: September 11th, 2001, thus 9/11/01. (Saying "The eleventh of September" is passive voice, and therefore wimpy.)

And pudding is a dessert with a gooey consistency, not some sort of meat, dammit!
Why not go the whole hog and speak l33t liek Jeff K?

R u afraid ull luk sily??!?!?

The English language is as it is because it was made that way for hundreds of years. Hell, why not go back to pure phonetic spelling again where any word that sounds the same can be spelt different in one sentence at least twice. People did it all the time.

English is officially spelt the way it is, deal with it.

Erm...that's not how it's spelled here, so I don't have
to deal with it. Americans are just fine with eons and encyclopedias.

Oh, and that reminds me; another thing that annoys me (not related the whole English-American dialect thing, necessarily) is words that have multiple past-tense versions. Spelled spelt, spilled spilt, and I can never remember if both are correct or if I'm just imagining things.

Uh...there aren't any places where it's legal to shoot an Irishman, are there?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-02-07 08:59pm

Yorkshire pudding is a pudding!
So is black pudding or steak and kidney pudding.
They're just not sweet!

Black pudding is most certainly not a pudding. A pudding is a creamy desert, not a sausage made of dried blood.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-02-07 09:04pm

If it's soft and squichy and stands up when ejected from a cup, it's a pudding.

A desert is not a pudding. It's a dehydrating stretch of land.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-02-07 09:13pm

A pudding is a creamy dessert. Not dried blood!