Does it seem like we've discussed many of this before? I specifically remember someone previously making Myth's point about the English changing their spelling of words, based on francophonic ideas, such as ending words with -our and -ise; The -or and -ize word endings were used first.

But no matter. We have language differences. So be it. What I don't like to hear, though, is that there is only one acceptable way. For example, with Richard's quote:

quote:

Americans, like many other nations, prefer to use their own variations of words and styles, even when there is agreement by international bodies.

Richard, what does the group say about the spelling of "sulfur?" I believe they prefer "aluminium" and "sulfur." So we're both wrong...or right...depending on your perspective.

Once again, I feel as though I am watching "Groundhog Day."

quote:

Does it seem like we've discussed many of this before?

Don't blame us. Talk to Shu. He started this one.

"There are places where English completely disappears. In America they haven't spoken it for years." --- Professor Higgins, in My Fair Lady

quote:

Richard, what does the group say about the spelling of "sulfur?" I believe they prefer "aluminium" and "sulfur."

As I wrote earlier, I was quoting Michael Quinion; I've looked briefly at the IUPAC site but haven't been able to find that part of it that gives the preferred spellings.

Neither could I, Richard. I relied principally on the Quinion article you cited. Quinion said said that IUPAC prefers "aluminium" (the British version) and "sulfur" (the US version) over the alternate spellings. The IUPAC site itself has an apparent confirmation where it lists aluminium before aluminum. On its equivalent "sulfur" page, it lists sulfur (the US spelling) only.

That is what prompted my question to you a couple of days ago, regarding "sulfur". You see the point, I trust.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: shufitz,

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English: the emasculated US pint

Richard, surely you didn't intend to offend, so you must have forgotten that we talked about this phrase of yours in 2005, and again in 2006. Hence this reminder.

quote:

Don't blame us. Talk to Shu. He started this one.

Well, first of all, I wasn't blaming anyone. And secondly, I disagree with you. Any subject can be discussed, several times if wished. After all, when new people come, they might not have been a part of the original discussion. Or perhaps things have changed since 2002, for example, when this was first brought up. However, it is important, I think, to be respectful in tone and in use of language. Words like "emasculated" or a tone like "which is why international standards have been agreed. I adhere to them; I believe others should as well" could create an emotional, rather than the hoped-for intellectual response. And the irony is that when it comes to "sulfur," England doesn't adhere to the supposed "standards" by the very same organization. I've noticed that there has never been a response to that.

Along these lines, just today I was reviewing an article about cultural sensitivity of language, and it reminded me of this thread. Here is an excerpt:

quote:

All pretest items are reviewed for sensitivity which is designed to eliminate item wording and content that could be considered elitist or stereotypical, have different meanings for different ethnic, gender or geographic groups, or have inappropriate tone.

and then:

quote:

. The items are presented in batches and each batch is reviewed by a trained sensitivity reviewer for inappropriate terminology, stereotypes, underlying assumptions, ethnocentrism and elitism, tone of language or inflammatory materials.

BTW, the first mention of "aluminium" in this thread, was found here; the subject of the thread was about the pronunciation of "specialty."

quote:

Don't blame us. Talk to Shu. He started this one.

If i'm EVER serious, I'll let you all know. Till then, think of each of my posts being typed by me with a ****-eating grin plastered on my face.

I know, Proof. But it did give me a chance to spout off a bit. Heck it has been a week or so since I've been able to do that.

Sorry I took you seriously.

Since a pint is supposed to be a pound, they must have like diet water over there in merry old England

quote:

Since a pint is supposed to be a pound, they must have like diet water over there in merry old England

A US pint of water does, indeed, weigh one pound avoirdupois. But the doggeral quoted in US schools, "A pint is a pound the whole world around" is true only if the world is considered to be the USA (common enough in some US circles, I accept).

Although the US pint is the older measure, the Imperial pint is used in many parts of the world. An Imperial gallon (eight pints) weighs 10 pounds and a pint therefore weighs 1.25 pounds.