LL-L "Orthography" 2002.04.09 (04) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 09.APR.2002 (04) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: "Ian James Parsley" <parsleyij at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2002.04.09 (02) [E]

Erek and all,

I would caution drawing too many exact parallels or
distinctions between British and American, where
actually very often something is *optional*.

For example, where American consistently has '-ize',
British has the *option* of '-ize' or '-ise' (and
indeed individual writers can be extremely
inconsistent on that one). Likewise British allows
both 'jail' and 'gaol', 'adviser' and 'advisor' etc.
On the other hand, American allows both 'ax' and
'axe', and in vocabulary 'autumn' or 'fall', 'car' or
'auto' (so it is not true to say, for example, that
'Americans say "fall" for "autumn" - they don't
always!)

In terms of lexicon, grammar and spellings there are
numerous examples of where one variety has a lone
standard form and the other has an option. It is in
fact comparatively rare for there to be direct
parallels or distinctions.

However, as you say, '-our' vs. '-or' is one (but note
British 'squalor', 'humorous'), to which I would add
'-re' vs. '-er' (but note American 'acre'). British
often doubles the final consonant and adds -e for
words of certain origin, eg 'programme' (but computer
'program') or 'catalogue', but even there American
always has 'league' and I saw 'epilogue' in an
American text recently.

American will also prefer single words where British
is uncertain (eg 'Northwest' vs. 'North West' or
'North-West' or 'North-west' or 'Northwest'; 'lineup'
vs. 'line-up' or 'line up'). To me, British does tend
eventually towards the American form.

At least Americans don't have to decide between
'queueing' and 'queuing'!

=====
------------------
Ian James Parsley
www.geocities.com/parsleyij
+44 (0)77 2095 1736
JOY - "Jesus, Others, You"

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Orthography

I think that Ian makes a valid point above.  At best we can talk about
"tendencies" and "preferences," rarely about hard and fast rule
differences between U.S. and other English orthographies (and also
lexica, as in the case of _autumn_ and _fall_).  The differences are
inconsistent like everything else in English orthography.

> For example, where American consistently has '-ize',
> British has the *option* of '-ize' or '-ise' (and
> indeed individual writers can be extremely
> inconsistent on that one).

Also note U.S. _advertise_ rather than expected *_advertize_.

> to which I would add
> '-re' vs. '-er' (but note American 'acre').

The U.S. spelling "theater" is rapidly changing to "theatre," or at
least "theatre" is well on its way of becoming an acceptable alternative
in the United States.  I believe that it began as promotional
affectation (based on the naive assumption that anything British is more
sophisticated, especially in the theater world).  Some newer movie
houses and live theaters now have "Theatre" in their names, and
"theatre" has meanwhile made its way into newspaper articles, especially
in review sections.

> words of certain origin, eg 'programme' (but computer
> 'program')

I have seen the spelling "programme" (instead of "program") in a couple
of printed American theater and concert programs.  I believe that it
sprang from the same mindset that introduced "theatre".

> or 'catalogue'

"Catalogue" and "catalog" are both acceptable in the U.S., as are
"epilogue" ~ "epilog", "monologue" ~ "monolog" and "prologue" ~
"prolog".

> At least Americans don't have to decide between
> 'queueing' and 'queuing'!

But they have made a grizzly choice, in my opinion, in not doubling
final consonants between short vowels and _-ing_ in certain words, such
as _bus_ > _busing_ (instead of _bussing_).  I want to pronounce
_busing_ ['bju:zIN] instead of ['bVsIN].  Oh, this also applies to the
plural in this case: _buses_ instead of _busses_.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 * Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
=======================================================================