Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Groups keyboard shortcuts have been updated
Dismiss
See shortcuts

Fight to save English spelling

7 views
Skip to first unread message

MC

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 7:19:49 AM10/15/03
to
Fight to save English spelling

A campaign is being launched to protect English words from being
replaced by American spellings.

Colchester MP Bob Russell wants to prevent youngsters from being shown
words such as "utilize", "color" and "traveling".

He wants to force computer companies to install spellchecking software
which offers English instead of American definitions.

Mr Russell said: "I also want the government to lead by example so all
our schoolchildren, and the public generally, use the English spelling
and not the American spelling."

Many operating systems, such as Microsoft's Windows, already allow users
to select the language they use on the computer. But often popular web
sites utilise American English.

The primary school at Eight Ash Green in Essex, in Mr Russell's
constituency, is sticking up for traditional British English.

Headteacher Nick Rudman told BBC Look East that when pupils there leave
the "u" out of the word labour, they are soon put right.

Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/essex/2967046.stm

Published: 2003/06/05 20:30:49 GMT

Michael Hamm

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 8:52:22 AM10/15/03
to
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 07:19:49 -0400, MC <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote,
in part, quoting the BBC [1]:

> MP Bob Russell wants to prevent youngsters from being shown words such
> as "utilize", "color" and "traveling".
>
> He wants to force computer companies to install spellchecking software
> which offers English instead of American definitions.
>
> Mr Russell said: "I also want the government to lead by example so all
> our schoolchildren, and the public generally, use the English spelling

The above is very different from the below:

> The primary school at Eight Ash Green in Essex, in Mr Russell's
> constituency, is sticking up for traditional British English.
>
> Headteacher Nick Rudman told BBC Look East that when pupils there leave
> the "u" out of the word labour, they are soon put right.

The first quote is trying to force the public (at least under certain
circumstances) to spell something correctly, which many might find
offensive (I do). The latter is just teaching proper orthography to
schoolchildren, something I think most people would agree is appropriate.

Incidentally, the MP's reference to "the English spelling" is offensive
also. If he's refering to the English language, it's offensive to us
Americans; if he's refering to England, to Scotsmen (inter alia).

[1] Why is it "the BBC" but just "CBS", "NBC", "ABC", "TNT", et al. (each
sans the article)? Is it a BrE/AmE distinction? Or just tradiiton
(the traditional name for the BBC is "the BBC" so it continues)?

Michael Hamm Since mid-September of 2003,
BA scl Math, PBK, NYU I've been erasing too much UBE.
msh...@math.wustl.edu Of a reply, then, if you have been cheated,
http://math.wustl.edu/~msh210/ Likely your mail's by mistake been deleted.

R F

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 11:26:12 AM10/15/03
to

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Michael Hamm wrote:

> [1] Why is it "the BBC" but just "CBS", "NBC", "ABC", "TNT", et al. (each
> sans the article)? Is it a BrE/AmE distinction? Or just tradiiton
> (the traditional name for the BBC is "the BBC" so it continues)?

Just tradition, is my guess. Consider the WB Network, assuming it still
exists: don't they call themselves "the WB"?

Actually, I think it may be more than just tradition. The structure of
the names "American Broadcasting Corporation" and "National Broadcasting
Corporation" (let's leave CBS aside FTM) resemble the structure of
"British Broadcastiing Corporation". But there always was a difference:
the BBC was a state monopoly, while ABC and NBC have always been
privately-owned companies. So I think the "American" and the "National"
started out as wishful thinking, like "We want to be *the* broadcaster for
the US"; you see this in lots of private entity names in the US. But the
"British" in BBC connoted "owned by the British state entity" from the
get-go. No?


Harvey Van Sickle

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 11:37:50 AM10/15/03
to
On 15 Oct 2003, R F wrote

>
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Michael Hamm wrote:

snip re: why "the" BBC?

> Just tradition, is my guess. Consider the WB Network, assuming it
> still exists: don't they call themselves "the WB"?

> Actually, I think it may be more than just tradition. The
> structure of the names "American Broadcasting Corporation" and
> "National Broadcasting Corporation" (let's leave CBS aside FTM)
> resemble the structure of "British Broadcastiing Corporation".
> But there always was a difference: the BBC was a state monopoly,
> while ABC and NBC have always been privately-owned companies. So
> I think the "American" and the "National" started out as wishful
> thinking, like "We want to be *the* broadcaster for the US"; you
> see this in lots of private entity names in the US. But the
> "British" in BBC connoted "owned by the British state entity" from
> the get-go. No?

In support of that, I'm fairly certain the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation (also state-owned) tends towards "the CBC" rather than
an unarticled "CBC".

(Or at least it used to be -- I'm not sure of the current practice.)

--
Cheers, Harvey

Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)

R H Draney

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 11:48:39 AM10/15/03
to
MC filted:

>
>The primary school at Eight Ash Green in Essex, in Mr Russell's
>constituency, is sticking up for traditional British English.
>
>Headteacher Nick Rudman told BBC Look East that when pupils there leave
>the "u" out of the word labour, they are soon put right.

Next year, he hopes to return the thorn and yogh to their rightful place in the
language....r

Matti Lamprhey

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 12:09:37 PM10/15/03
to
"R F" <rfon...@mail.wesleyan.edu> wrote...

Actually no. The B.B.C. (period periods, there) was originally The
British Broadcasting Company, a private company.

You can get a good idea of it all from here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/thenandnow/history/index.shtml

"The British Broadcasting Company, as the BBC was originally called, was
formed on 18 October 1922 by a group of leading wireless manufacturers
including Marconi. Daily broadcasting by the BBC began in Marconi’s
London studio, 2LO, in the Strand, on November 14, 1922. This was
followed the next day by broadcasts from Birmingham and Manchester."

Matti

Matti Lamprhey

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 12:12:52 PM10/15/03
to
"R H Draney" <dado...@earthlink.net> wrote...

I heard on the radio today that woad is due for a comeback.

Matti


david56

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 12:20:24 PM10/15/03
to
rfon...@mail.wesleyan.edu spake thus:

The BBC is not owned by the state. What a terrible idea. It is a
corporation established by Royal Charter.

--
David
=====

Adrian Bailey

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 12:58:55 PM10/15/03
to
"MC" <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote in message
news:copeSP-1BDA4A....@mail.inter.net...

> Fight to save English spelling
>
> A campaign is being launched to protect English words from being
> replaced by American spellings.
>
> Colchester MP Bob Russell wants to prevent youngsters from being shown
> words such as "utilize", "color" and "traveling".

Although I think British children should be taught British spelling, I don't
think it matters that much if they use US spellings or if Britain drifts
over to US spelling.

> He wants to force computer companies to install spellchecking software
> which offers English instead of American definitions.

I do agree that much of the WP software being used in the UK has US
spell/grammar checkers installed and this is leading to confusion, error and
inconsistency. Whether the government should legislate to mitigate this
problem, I'm not sure.

Adrian


sage

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 1:04:48 PM10/15/03
to

"Harvey Van Sickle" <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9415A92D...@194.168.222.41...

Both get used, in fact.
"Royal Canadian Air farce is on CBC tonight." (As opposed to being on CTV.)

But: "The CBC had its budget cut again today." (so the G-G could explore
Vanuatu's culture scene.)

Cheers, Sage
>


sage

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 1:06:16 PM10/15/03
to

"Matti Lamprhey" <matti-...@totally-official.com> wrote in message
news:bmjrv8$nhcc4$1...@ID-103223.news.uni-berlin.de...

You mean the Conservatives'll prevail ... somewhere?

Cheers, Sage
>


Matti Lamprhey

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 1:00:49 PM10/15/03
to
"david56" <bass.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote...

Isn't it effectively owned by the nation? Certainly not by the
government. I would equate "state" with nation rather than government.

Matti


Alan Jones

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 2:02:21 PM10/15/03
to

"Adrian Bailey" <da...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:T_ejb.400$l37...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...

If it's Microsoft software, it can easily be modified to use a British
English spell-checker. There is no need to install additional software. (Of
course, as reference to any Oxford dictionary will confirm, "utilize" is an
acceptable BrE spelling. But pupils should be taught that "use" would
normally be a better choice of word.)

Alan Jones


M. J. Powell

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 3:20:51 PM10/15/03
to
In message <bmjrv8$nhcc4$1...@ID-103223.news.uni-berlin.de>, Matti Lamprhey
<matti-...@totally-official.com> writes

Doaw!

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Ross Howard

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 3:59:24 PM10/15/03
to
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 11:26:12 -0400, R F <rfon...@mail.wesleyan.edu>
wrought:

I think you may be right. As an institution, rather than a private
company, it's treated like "the CIA", "the UN", etc. This would seem
to be borne out by the articlelessness (TM) of the traditional "other
side", ITV, which is a consortium of private firms (although now, *de
facto*, a consortium of one).

***********
Ross Howard

MC

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 4:25:00 PM10/15/03
to
In article <T_ejb.400$l37...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk>,
"Adrian Bailey" <da...@hotmail.com> wrote:

I think most half-decent word-processors let you choose between a
variety of "national" dictionaries, don't they?

Adrian Bailey

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 4:47:50 PM10/15/03
to
"MC" <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote in message
news:copeSP-D5D902....@mail.inter.net...

> I think most half-decent word-processors let you choose between a
> variety of "national" dictionaries, don't they?

They might let you choose, but most are set to "US English", even for
British sales, and most people don't realise this unless it's pointed out to
them.

Adrian


MC

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 4:48:30 PM10/15/03
to
In article <rlijb.69$Ll...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk>,
"Adrian Bailey" <da...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > I think most half-decent word-processors let you choose between a
> > variety of "national" dictionaries, don't they?
>
> They might let you choose, but most are set to "US English", even for
> British sales, and most people don't realise this unless it's pointed out to
> them.

You can lead 'em to water but you can't make 'em drink, I suppose.

Harvey Van Sickle

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 5:20:22 PM10/15/03
to
On 15 Oct 2003, Adrian Bailey wrote

That's usually the case, but I don't think this is the invariable
default for the oft-maligned MS Word.

I seem to recall that when I last installed it, it recognised that my
machine was set to UK timte, and defaulted to the British English
dictionary.

Richard Chambers

unread,
Oct 15, 2003, 7:24:04 PM10/15/03
to

"MC" <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote

> Fight to save English spelling
>
> A campaign is being launched to protect English words from being
> replaced by American spellings.
>
> Colchester MP Bob Russell wants to prevent youngsters from being shown
> words such as "utilize", "color" and "traveling".

------------------
Mr Russell will have to provide some additional explanation if he is to
receive my support in this campaign. He wants a double-l in "travelling",
contrary to the US American preference for a single-l in "traveling". But, I
assume, he wants a single-l at the end of "fulfil", contrary to the US
American preference for a double-l at the end of "fulfill". Does he do this
purely to be contrary? Let him decide whether he wants a single-l or a
double-l, then ask him to apply rules consistently across all spellings.
------------------
>
> [ . . .]


>
> Headteacher Nick Rudman told BBC Look East that when pupils there leave
> the "u" out of the word labour, they are soon put right.
>

------------------
Such teaching may become laborious, especially when the teachers have to
explain that the u *must* be left out of "labour" to form the adjective.
Similarly, "colour" becomes "coloration" in BrE spelling.

I have little patience with Britishness for Britishness's sake, where there
is no other logical or practical justification. If an AmE spelling is
superior to its BrE counterpart, it is common sense for us to adopt it. Such
examples are indeed the very words quoted by Mr Rusell, such as "color" and
"labor", since the AmE spelling leads to greater self-consistency when
derivative words (coloration, laborious) are formed from the main stem.

The opposition to American spelling is motivated by the desire to be
patriotic. The patriotism becomes counter-productive if it over-complicates
our spellings without good reason. The big weakness of the English language
is its over-complicated spelling. Some standardisation is overdue. The USA,
with five times our population, is now the major player in the English
language, and Mr Russell should reconcile himself to that fact.

Why am I arguing this way when all my postings are consistently in BrE
spelling? That's because I have no control over where my fingers go on the
keyboard. The fingers have typed the BrE spelling even before my conscious
brain has thought about it. There is nothing I can do about it, it always
comes out as BrE. But that sort of ad hominem argument is no reason why our
schoolchildren should be narrow-mindedly taught BrE rather than AmE
spelling.

Richard Chambers Leeds UK.


Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 1:31:06 AM10/16/03
to

R F wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Michael Hamm wrote:
>
> > [1] Why is it "the BBC" but just "CBS", "NBC", "ABC", "TNT", et al. (each
> > sans the article)? Is it a BrE/AmE distinction? Or just tradiiton
> > (the traditional name for the BBC is "the BBC" so it continues)?
>
> Just tradition, is my guess. Consider the WB Network, assuming it still
> exists: don't they call themselves "the WB"?
>

ABC needs to differentiate itself from The ABC, The Australian
Broadcasting Corporation.

Charles Riggs

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 6:14:07 AM10/16/03
to
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 22:20:22 +0100, Harvey Van Sickle
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:


>That's usually the case, but I don't think this is the invariable
>default for the oft-maligned MS Word.
>
>I seem to recall that when I last installed it, it recognised that my
>machine was set to UK timte, and defaulted to the British English
>dictionary.

Mine too. I wonder if it has something to do with changing, on Windows
installation, the default US settings to the optional British and
Irish ones for region, keyboard, and...uh...something else.
--

Charles Riggs
Email address: chriggsŚatŚeircomŚdotŚnet

Raymond S. Wise

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 4:01:45 PM10/16/03
to
"Charles Riggs" <No...@aircom.net> wrote in message
news:qgrsov0ifqudeb8sg...@4ax.com...


I don't know if I've asked this before in this newsgroup, but there's a
problem I need solved. I have an account in Yahoo! France and used to be
able to go to it and have everything in French, including, most usefully,
the spelling checker. Now when I go to it, it's always in English. Anyone
know how to fix this?


--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA

E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com


Harvey Van Sickle

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 5:05:49 PM10/16/03
to
On 16 Oct 2003, Raymond S. Wise wrote

-snip-



> I don't know if I've asked this before in this newsgroup, but
> there's a problem I need solved. I have an account in Yahoo!
> France and used to be able to go to it and have everything in
> French, including, most usefully, the spelling checker. Now when I
> go to it, it's always in English. Anyone know how to fix this?

(This may qualify for the "egg-sucking-by-grannies Teaching
Certificate"; if so, apologies.)

Do you clear your cookies regularly -- no, *not* toss them: *do*
behave yourself in the back row, there -- or do you use a cookie
manager?

The most likely reasons, to me, would be either (a) you've got a cookie
on your system that's identifying where you're from -- and identifying
that as an English nation; or (b) you've cleared all the cookies off
your system, and it's "re-defaulting" to where you're coming from each
time you access the site.

On a lot of sites -- google, the BBC, weather sites, and such-like --
you can opt for geographical preferences, but they'll only "save" those
if you retain the appropriate cookie on your machine.

Dunno if this will help; hope so.

Dr Robin Bignall

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 6:23:43 PM10/16/03
to

They are talking this week about the power generation margin between
everyone being able to cook Christmas luncheon and then watch HM, and total
nationwide blackout, is only 2% because of the closure and mothballing of
power stations. We're in for a bad winter, then, and will need something to
wear to keep warm.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

R F

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 7:21:47 PM10/16/03
to

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall wrote:

> They are talking this week about the power generation margin between
> everyone being able to cook Christmas luncheon and then watch HM, and total
> nationwide blackout, is only 2% because of the closure and mothballing of
> power stations.

"Christmas luncheon"? Should I ask what that is?


Skitt

unread,
Oct 16, 2003, 7:28:14 PM10/16/03
to

Something you have to tide you over until Christmas dinner, I suppose.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

Linz

unread,
Oct 17, 2003, 1:27:55 PM10/17/03
to
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 22:20:22 +0100, Harvey Van Sickle
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>On 15 Oct 2003, Adrian Bailey wrote
>
>> "MC" <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote in message
>> news:copeSP-D5D902....@mail.inter.net...
>>> I think most half-decent word-processors let you choose between a
>>> variety of "national" dictionaries, don't they?
>>
>> They might let you choose, but most are set to "US English", even
>> for British sales, and most people don't realise this unless it's
>> pointed out to them.
>
>That's usually the case, but I don't think this is the invariable
>default for the oft-maligned MS Word.

It seems to be - one of the first things I do when my lecturers get
upgraded pcs at work is remind them to change the dictionary.

>I seem to recall that when I last installed it, it recognised that my
>machine was set to UK timte, and defaulted to the British English
>dictionary.

You lucky thing. Our machines come set to UK time but still default to
the US English dictionary.
--
Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen

david56

unread,
Oct 17, 2003, 4:40:31 PM10/17/03
to
matti-...@totally-official.com spake thus:

I supposed that "by the nation" is about the closest one can get to
describing the ownership of the BBC.

I understand "the state" to be the machineries of the state, not the
people of the nation.

--
David
=====

Robert Bannister

unread,
Oct 17, 2003, 8:37:47 PM10/17/03
to
Skitt wrote:
> R F wrote:
>
>>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>
>
>>>They are talking this week about the power generation margin between
>>>everyone being able to cook Christmas luncheon and then watch HM,
>>>and total nationwide blackout, is only 2% because of the closure and
>>>mothballing of power stations.
>>
>>"Christmas luncheon"? Should I ask what that is?
>
>
> Something you have to tide you over until Christmas dinner, I suppose.

Since I've recently taken to having the Christmas meal in a hotel, I've
noticed I have to be careful to distinguish between 'lunch(-eon)' and
'dinner' if I don't want to have it at the wrong time. At home, it is
traditional to have Xmas dinner at lunchtime, which, because of panics
over the turkey cooking time, usually ends up being somewhere between 2
and 3 pm. When I say 'at home', I mean at home here in Australia - us
Poms still stick to the English hot meal routine. Real born & bred
Ozzies eat cold seafood and salad on the beach.

--
Rob Bannister

R F

unread,
Oct 18, 2003, 1:17:51 AM10/18/03
to

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Robert Bannister wrote:

> Since I've recently taken to having the Christmas meal in a hotel, I've
> noticed I have to be careful to distinguish between 'lunch(-eon)' and
> 'dinner' if I don't want to have it at the wrong time.

That's an odd use of "recently" if what you mean is "in recent
Christmases" (I can't figure out what else you might mean, assuming
Christmas meals are only had once a year), but others may disagree.


Robert Bannister

unread,
Oct 18, 2003, 6:44:14 PM10/18/03
to

I did it for the first time last Xmas and have just booked again for the
coming one. Compared with the 63 years of my life, this is recent
practice for me.


--
Rob Bannister

Matt Davis

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 1:46:34 AM10/19/03
to
"Richard Chambers" <richard....@NOSPAMntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:oNkjb.704$ov2...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...

>
> "MC" <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote
>
> > Fight to save English spelling
> >
> > A campaign is being launched to protect English words from being
> > replaced by American spellings.
> >
> > Colchester MP Bob Russell wants to prevent youngsters from being shown
> > words such as "utilize", "color" and "traveling".
> ------------------
> Mr Russell will have to provide some additional explanation if he is to
> receive my support in this campaign. He wants a double-l in "travelling",
> contrary to the US American preference for a single-l in "traveling". But, I
> assume, he wants a single-l at the end of "fulfil", contrary to the US
> American preference for a double-l at the end of "fulfill". Does he do this
> purely to be contrary? Let him decide whether he wants a single-l or a
> double-l, then ask him to apply rules consistently across all spellings.
> ------------------

The rules used in determining the spelling of words such as "travelling" are a
different set of rules to those used to determine the spelling of words such as
"fulfil". "travelling" is based on the rules followed when spelling bisyllabic
(?) words with no stress on the second syllable, and using the "-ing" form - you
double the final consonant in these cases in English English. "fulfil" comes
under a different set of rules.

> > Headteacher Nick Rudman told BBC Look East that when pupils there leave
> > the "u" out of the word labour, they are soon put right.
> >
> ------------------
> Such teaching may become laborious, especially when the teachers have to
> explain that the u *must* be left out of "labour" to form the adjective.
> Similarly, "colour" becomes "coloration" in BrE spelling.
>
> I have little patience with Britishness for Britishness's sake, where there
> is no other logical or practical justification. If an AmE spelling is
> superior to its BrE counterpart, it is common sense for us to adopt it. Such
> examples are indeed the very words quoted by Mr Rusell, such as "color" and
> "labor", since the AmE spelling leads to greater self-consistency when
> derivative words (coloration, laborious) are formed from the main stem.

Have you never considered the fact that "colour" is more aesthetically pleasing
when spelt that way? "color" and "labor" are plain ugly.

> The opposition to American spelling is motivated by the desire to be
> patriotic. The patriotism becomes counter-productive if it over-complicates
> our spellings without good reason. The big weakness of the English language
> is its over-complicated spelling. Some standardisation is overdue. The USA,
> with five times our population, is now the major player in the English
> language, and Mr Russell should reconcile himself to that fact.

Yes, but English originated in England, and Americans should not change our fine
language without our permission. You are English yourself, so why stick up for
THEM?

Cheers,

Matt


Robert Lieblich

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 4:58:12 AM10/19/03
to
Matt Davis wrote:

[ ... ]

> Have you never considered the fact that "colour" is more aesthetically pleasing
> when spelt that way? "color" and "labor" are plain ugly.

And of course the fact that you've seen them with a "u" all your
life has nothing to do with your aesthetic judgment. (I don't know
you well enough to be sure your remark was tongue-in-cheek.)

[ ... ]



> Yes, but English originated in England, and Americans should not change our fine
> language without our permission. You are English yourself, so why stick up for
> THEM?

From the AUE FAQ's list of things posters should avoid:

"(4) assertions that one variety of English is "true English".

See <http://www.alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxguidel.html>.
(Prior parenthetical remark incorporated by reference.)

--
Bob Lieblich
Murrican

R F

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 12:34:24 PM10/19/03
to

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Matt Davis wrote:

> Have you never considered the fact that "colour" is more aesthetically pleasing
> when spelt that way? "color" and "labor" are plain ugly.

You're more right than you realize, Matt. You're like Enoch Powell in
this case. Americans may use "color" and "labor", but most honest ones
who (= TC 'that') have considered the matter will agree with you that
these spellings are uglier than BrE "colour" and "labour". Indeed,
you'll sometimes see BrE spellings used for stylized effect in AmE
contexts, for their aesthetic value. Not so much with "colour" or
"labour", but you'll see lots of Midwestern shopping malls with "Centre"
in their names, frex.

But the other side of this is that "colour" and "labour" also seem sort of
dainty and effete. Rather like French, only less so. So it comes down to
this, Matt: Do you want to be a rugged muscular manly
football-hooligan-type user of "color" and "labor", or do you want to be
a Gallophilic ballet-dancing girly-man RP-accented Oxbridgean user of
"colour" and "labour"? Your choice, son. Just as every BrE citizen
defines himself by what newspaper he reads (_The Guardian_ in John Dean's
case), so too every BrE citizen defines himself by whether he wishes to
adhere to BrE spelling conventions.

> Yes, but English originated in England, and Americans should not change our fine
> language without our permission. You are English yourself, so why stick up for
> THEM?

Actually, English originated in the Angul district of Schleswig.


Maria Conlon

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 2:45:56 PM10/19/03
to
[...]

<laughter>

Do you realize, Richard, that you have taken on not only the people of
England, but of Ireland as well? Calling the men less than men is a
serious thing.

You may be hearing from them, and despite what others in aue may say,
the Irish are a quick-tempered group. (I'm going by the way my
father-in-law behaved almost to the end of his life.)

Maria Conlon

Simon R. Hughes

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 3:25:03 PM10/19/03
to
Thus spake R F:

>
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Matt Davis wrote:
>
> > Have you never considered the fact that "colour" is more aesthetically pleasing
> > when spelt that way? "color" and "labor" are plain ugly.
>
> You're more right than you realize, Matt. You're like Enoch Powell in
> this case. Americans may use "color" and "labor", but most honest ones
> who (= TC 'that') have considered the matter will agree with you that
> these spellings are uglier than BrE "colour" and "labour". Indeed,
> you'll sometimes see BrE spellings used for stylized effect in AmE
> contexts, for their aesthetic value. Not so much with "colour" or
> "labour", but you'll see lots of Midwestern shopping malls with "Centre"
> in their names, frex.
>
> But the other side of this is that "colour" and "labour" also seem sort of
> dainty and effete. Rather like French, only less so. So it comes down to
> this, Matt: Do you want to be a rugged muscular manly
> football-hooligan-type user of "color" and "labor", or do you want to be
> a Gallophilic ballet-dancing girly-man RP-accented Oxbridgean user of
> "colour" and "labour"? Your choice, son. Just as every BrE citizen
> defines himself by what newspaper he reads (_The Guardian_ in John Dean's
> case), so too every BrE citizen defines himself by whether he wishes to
> adhere to BrE spelling conventions.

Is there something wrong with "dainty", Richard?

Something wrong with "effete"?

Is there something wrong with liking the ballet, Bob?

And how would you define "girly-man"?

Sounds to me like you're guilty of negatively stereotyping
homosexuals, Dick. Shameful to use such a negative stereotype as an
insult.

I would have thought such a stone-caster as you would make sure he
was without sin.

> > Yes, but English originated in England, and Americans should not change our fine
> > language without our permission. You are English yourself, so why stick up for
> > THEM?
>
> Actually, English originated in the Angul district of Schleswig.

Not good enough. We want a street address.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Note correct email address. -->
<!-- Roger Rabbit for President!
(Don't say it couldn't happen.) -->

Simon R. Hughes

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 3:26:13 PM10/19/03
to
Thus spake Maria Conlon:

Gay is less than a man? Oh dear.

> You may be hearing from them, and despite what others in aue may say,
> the Irish are a quick-tempered group. (I'm going by the way my
> father-in-law behaved almost to the end of his life.)

He liked the ballet?

R F

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 3:27:21 PM10/19/03
to

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Maria Conlon wrote:

> Do you realize, Richard, that you have taken on not only the people of
> England, but of Ireland as well? Calling the men less than men is a
> serious thing.
>
> You may be hearing from them, and despite what others in aue may say,
> the Irish are a quick-tempered group. (I'm going by the way my
> father-in-law behaved almost to the end of his life.)

"Well," as Irish-descended and Illinois native Ronald "Dutch" Reagan used
to say, this is certainly true of AUE's most actively-posting Irishman,
Padraig Breathnach. He's real into this whole chivalry thing too, I
think, which I guess has something to do with outmoded gender roles and
Hibernian _machismo_ (there must be a good Gaelic synonym for
"machismo") and such. I can see why the Hemingwayesque Chuck
Riggs chose Ireland as his post-American home. (I hope CR is not insulted
by my calling him Hemingwayesque, which is more compliment than insult,
but I know he's a Faulkner fan.)

Tony Cooper likes to emphasize his tenuous links to Ireland and Irish
culture, but the proof is in the pudding; Coop, unlike Edmund Burke,
Bono Vox, and other famous Irishmen, is very slow to anger. Coop would
like you to think that it's that whole lace-curtains vs. shanty thing,
"domestic service Irish" vs. "field Irish" (OPISW "irish"), BIDTS. Truth
is, Coop's a Hoosier, and there's naught wrong with that.


Simon R. Hughes

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 5:38:57 PM10/19/03
to
Thus spake R F:

> He's real into this whole chivalry thing too, I
> think, which I guess has something to do with outmoded gender roles

What about outmoded gender *stereotypes*, Bob?

Richard Chambers

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 6:30:55 PM10/19/03
to

"R F" <rfon...@alumni.wesleyan.edu> wrote
>
> [. . .]

> [. . .] Americans may use "color" and "labor", but most honest ones


> who (= TC 'that') have considered the matter will agree with you that
> these spellings are uglier than BrE "colour" and "labour". Indeed,
> you'll sometimes see BrE spellings used for stylized effect in AmE
> contexts, for their aesthetic value. Not so much with "colour" or
> "labour", but you'll see lots of Midwestern shopping malls with "Centre"
> in their names, frex.
>

That's a strange coincidence. Over here, it is a relatively common sight to
see signs incorporating the word "Center". For the same twee reasons that
you have described. Although the British, in general, tend to disdain all
foreigners, we can never resist the opportunity to use foreign words or
foreign spellings.

We have also enthusiastically adopted the execrable US American habit of
deliberately and knowingly mis-spelling words in advertisements and product
names. The latest example, which I saw for the first time yesterday, was an
advertisement hoarding which extolled the virtues of the New!!! New!!!
New!!! product KitKat Kubes [1].

[1] KitKat is the product name of a brand of wafer biscuit, covered with
rather sweet milk chocolate, and very popular in Britain. To judge by the
advertisement, KitKat Kubes are packets of individual bite-size KitKats,
approximating in shape to Kubes.

Richard Chambers Leeds UK.


MC

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 7:03:49 PM10/19/03
to
In article <NgEkb.992$427...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>,
"Richard Chambers" <richard....@NOSPAMntlworld.com> wrote:

What do you think of this pair?

BrE "kerb"

AmE "curb"

Alison

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 7:34:00 PM10/19/03
to
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:03:49 -0400, MC <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net>
wrote:

>In article <NgEkb.992$427...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> "Richard Chambers" <richard....@NOSPAMntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "R F" <rfon...@alumni.wesleyan.edu> wrote


>>

>> We have also enthusiastically adopted the execrable US American habit of
>> deliberately and knowingly mis-spelling words in advertisements and product
>> names. The latest example, which I saw for the first time yesterday, was an
>> advertisement hoarding which extolled the virtues of the New!!! New!!!
>> New!!! product KitKat Kubes [1].
>>
>> [1] KitKat is the product name of a brand of wafer biscuit, covered with
>> rather sweet milk chocolate, and very popular in Britain. To judge by the
>> advertisement, KitKat Kubes are packets of individual bite-size KitKats,
>> approximating in shape to Kubes.
>
>What do you think of this pair?
>
>BrE "kerb"
>
>AmE "curb"

Both curb and kerb exist in BrE. They just mean different things.
The kerb is the edge of the pavement (that's sidewalk to Americans).
To curb is a verb, as in "Curb your enthusiasm"


--
Alison

R F

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 7:38:06 PM10/19/03
to

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Richard Chambers wrote:

>
> "R F" <rfon...@alumni.wesleyan.edu> wrote
> >
> > [. . .]
>
> > [. . .] Americans may use "color" and "labor", but most honest ones
> > who (= TC 'that') have considered the matter will agree with you that
> > these spellings are uglier than BrE "colour" and "labour". Indeed,
> > you'll sometimes see BrE spellings used for stylized effect in AmE
> > contexts, for their aesthetic value. Not so much with "colour" or
> > "labour", but you'll see lots of Midwestern shopping malls with "Centre"
> > in their names, frex.
> >
>
> That's a strange coincidence. Over here, it is a relatively common sight to
> see signs incorporating the word "Center". For the same twee reasons that
> you have described. Although the British, in general, tend to disdain all
> foreigners, we can never resist the opportunity to use foreign words or
> foreign spellings.

What does the spelling "center" suggest to a BrE? Surely it doesn't
convey the elegance and opulence that "centre" conveys to the AmE.

> We have also enthusiastically adopted the execrable US American habit of
> deliberately and knowingly mis-spelling words in advertisements and product
> names. The latest example, which I saw for the first time yesterday, was an
> advertisement hoarding which extolled the virtues of the New!!! New!!!
> New!!! product KitKat Kubes [1].

Are you certain that this practice originated in the US and not in
Britain?

> [1] KitKat is the product name of a brand of wafer biscuit, covered with
> rather sweet milk chocolate, and very popular in Britain.

Kit Kats are well known in the US too; after all, we invented them.
We wouldn't describe them as "wafer biscuits", however. I'd put Kit Kats
in the "candy bar" class.

I'm surprised that they're popular in Britain, since Kit Kats combine
sweet and savoury flavours in ways that I thought were forbidden in the
UK. Granted, the end result is basically sweet.

> To judge by the
> advertisement, KitKat Kubes are packets of individual bite-size KitKats,
> approximating in shape to Kubes.

Are these also being marketed under that name in the US? "Kit Kat Kube"
is bound to suggest the Ku Klux Klan to some of us, such as me. In the
Netherlands and places like that, where (white) people worship famed
computer scientist and TeX inventor Don Knuth as a "Grand Wizard", things
like that might fly, but it can't happen here, OSIWT.

MC

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 7:40:34 PM10/19/03
to
In article <fo76pv4sgsuit77co...@4ax.com>,
Alison <news....@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> >BrE "kerb"
> >
> >AmE "curb"
>
> Both curb and kerb exist in BrE. They just mean different things.
> The kerb is the edge of the pavement (that's sidewalk to Americans).
> To curb is a verb, as in "Curb your enthusiasm"

Indeed... but in AmE the noun for the edge of the sidewalk (pavement) is
the curb... and it seems to me to make more sense than kerb, (which
always strikes me as a most un-English-looking word).

Reinhold (Rey) Aman

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 8:25:39 PM10/19/03
to
Simon R. Hughes wrote:

> Thus spake R F:

> > Matt Davis wrote:

> > > Have you never considered the fact that "colour" is more aesthetically
> > > pleasing when spelt that way? "color" and "labor" are plain ugly.

Spelt, shmelt. You're wrong. "Color" and "labor" are true to their
Latin source and are the forms used in all major Romance languages
except French. BrE "colour" and "labour" are plain ugly, bastardized,
and look very silly. There's no sound reason for using the
superfluous <u> in these words. Any American -- writing in the USA --
who apes the Brits and writes "colour" and "labour" is either
pretentious or a faggot or both.

Br. English: colour labour [very silly & pretentious]
Am. English: color labor [cool & correct]
Latin: color labor
Italian: colore labor-
Spanish: color labor
Portuguese: color- labor
Rumanian: color- labor-
French: couleur labour

Q.E.D.

> > You're more right than you realize, Matt. You're like Enoch Powell in
> > this case. Americans may use "color" and "labor", but most honest ones
> > who (= TC 'that') have considered the matter will agree with you that
> > these spellings are uglier than BrE "colour" and "labour".

Heavy-dose-of-irony & dry wit alert!

[...]

> > But the other side of this is that "colour" and "labour" also
> > seem sort of dainty and effete.

Good man, Robert. They not only seem but *are*.

> > Rather like French, only less so. So it comes down to
> > this, Matt: Do you want to be a rugged muscular manly
> > football-hooligan-type user of "color" and "labor", or do you want to be
> > a Gallophilic ballet-dancing girly-man RP-accented Oxbridgean user of
> > "colour" and "labour"? Your choice, son. Just as every BrE citizen
> > defines himself by what newspaper he reads (_The Guardian_ in John Dean's
> > case), so too every BrE citizen defines himself by whether he wishes to
> > adhere to BrE spelling conventions.

> Is there something wrong with "dainty", Richard?

For a man to be so, yes.

> Something wrong with "effete"?

For a man to be so, yes.

> Is there something wrong with liking the ballet, Bob?

For a man to do so, yes.

> And how would you define "girly-man"?

I would define "girly-man" as an American who writes "colour" and "labour."

> Sounds to me like you're guilty of negatively stereotyping
> homosexuals, Dick. Shameful to use such a negative stereotype
> as an insult.

Have you no sense of "humour," Simoun? Give Richard credit for
cleverly paraphrasing "faggot" as "a Gallophilic ballet-dancing
girly-man RP-accented Oxbridgean user of 'colour' and 'labour.'"

> I would have thought such a stone-caster as you would make
> sure he was without sin.

Professor Fontana *is* without sin! He's the purest spirit in this
foul group.

> > > Yes, but English originated in England, and Americans should not change
> > > our fine language without our permission. You are English yourself, so
> > > why stick up for THEM?

> > Actually, English originated in the Angul district of Schleswig.

> Not good enough. We want a street address.

Umlautstraße 14
D-20034 Holstein
Germany

--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/

R F

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 8:38:08 PM10/19/03
to

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, Alison wrote:

> Both curb and kerb exist in BrE. They just mean different things.
> The kerb is the edge of the pavement (that's sidewalk to Americans).

Well, to Americans the curb is the edge of the pavement as well as the
edge of the sidewalk, I suppose.

> To curb is a verb, as in "Curb your enthusiasm"

Or as in "please curb your dog", well-known to New York city residents.


MC

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 8:42:43 PM10/19/03
to
In article <bmvaj7$dh5$1...@e250.ripco.com>,
ar...@iname.com (Murray Arnow) wrote:

> "Reinhold (Rey) Aman" <am...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> > Spelt, shmelt. You're wrong. "Color" and "labor" are true to their
> > Latin source and are the forms used in all major Romance languages
> > except French. BrE "colour" and "labour" are plain ugly, bastardized,
> > and look very silly. There's no sound reason for using the
> > superfluous <u> in these words. Any American -- writing in the USA --
> > who apes the Brits and writes "colour" and "labour" is either
> > pretentious or a faggot or both.
> >

> Ouch!

Source:

The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes
(1907­21).
VOLUME XVIII. Later National Literature, Part III.
XXX. The English Language in America.


§ 7. American Spelling.

Dr. Johnson¹s spelling has undergone some simplification in both
countries: almanack, musick, errour, horrour, interiour, successour,
emperour, oratour, have everywhere dropped unnecessary letters. The
abandonment of the French -our for Latin -or has gone a little further
in the American printing-houses; honour, humour, vigour, harbour,
labour, neighbour, valour, clamour, clangour, saviour, and a few others
have joined the overwhelming majority of -or words. British men of
letters could be cited who have employed the same simplification. Other
French spellings like theatre and centre are less common in America than
in England. Parallel to the simplification of almanac(k) are wag(g)on,
travel(l)er. Of the British attempts to distinguish by the spelling
story, narrative (plural stories), from storey, floor (pl. storeys), and
curb (bit) from kerb (stone), the first has some etymological argument
in its favour, but neither has commended itself to American usage.
Britons themselves are quite as likely to spell cider and pajamas in the
fashion always employed in America as they are to write cyder and
pyjamas.

Matt Davis

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 9:37:46 PM10/19/03