Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Member |
Brits and USns have differing spellings for certain words. I'd question the usual view that we USn's changed the British spelling. That's the standard view; even Mencken speaks of "the chief changes made in the standard English spelling in the United States." But I don't think that's accurate. Rather, Brit spelling was not yet standardized three centuries ago, and from that time the two areas moved differently, crystalizing into two different spelling conventions. Of Mencken's 17 listed of specific categories of differences, four are the most significant
(By the way, on some of these, haven't you Brits have by now moved to the US verison? I presume you still don't write interne, forme, and pease, for example.)This message has been edited. Last edited by: shufitz, | ||
|
Member |
A website mentions three of these areas of difference (1. color/colour, 2. traveler/traveller, and 3. theater/theatre) and adds 4. civilize/civilise. It then gives brief histories. According to that site: The spellings as 3. civilize and 4. theater (and the like) had been established as the norm by 1700. However, perhaps because of the influence of French spelling, British writers began using the -ise and -re endings. Dr. Johnson endorsed those Frenchified usages, and they then became the standard in the UK, but they never much caught on in the US. Even today the OED continues to use the older -ize form, as used in the US. So did the Times of London, until Rupert Murdoch took over. There's a different story behind the UK/US differences exemplified by 1. color/colour and 2. traveler/traveller. The site says, "'Colour' and 'traveller' were the norm by 1700 but Webster rejected these in favour of 'color' and 'traveler', and Americans have followed his lead."This message has been edited. Last edited by: wordnerd, | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |