changed words in Harry Potter books

[Lynne Murphy]

--On Tuesday, January 23, 2001 4:39 pm -0500 "Douglas G. Wilson"
<douglas at NB.NET> wrote:
> "Corrupted"? I agree. But I suspect that the replacement of "philosopher"
> with "sorcerer" was unrelated to the degree of erudition of the editors.
> If all of the editorial staff agreed that "philosopher" was clearly
> correct, for example, but a marketing survey showed that an additional
> 100,000 copies probably would be sold if the word "sorcerer" appeared in
> the title, what would have been the chosen title? If I had been the
> author (not a wealthy person until recently AFAIK), I might have approved
> this
> corrupt/cynical title change. Was the change made throughout the text? If
> so, that's somewhat another story.

Yes, it was made throughout the text, and that's why they have to film two
versions of every scene where the philosopher's/sorcerer's stone is
mentioned.

Lynne

M Lynne Murphy
Lecturer in Linguistics
School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences
University of Sussex
Brighton BN1 9QH
UK

phone +44-(0)1273-678844
fax   +44-(0)1273-671320