September 11th

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Proteus

If you want any sort of phonetic spelling then English isn't the language for you, and hasn't been for a very long time.

I believe I alluded to that, but notwithstanding the overall problem there might still be some value in planing down a few of the rougher edges. And even there, most of Webster's suggested spelling changes did not catch on.

[H1TMANish]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

what confuses me though is why they change things?

Legacy of Noah Webster and other textbook writers i believe, schools in America were a bit poor round the 1800s and seeing as America is a country populated by immigration from all round the world, these immagrants needed to learn the lingua franca, aka English. Admittadly English is a bit tricky to learn especially because of its irregularities, so textbook writers simplified it, and as always happens when people of multi languages inhabit the same lump of land, they bring their own differences into the language.

Language is a symptom of change, only America can oblige its spellings onto the British due to its media dominance.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

I believe I alluded to that, but notwithstanding the overall problem there might still be some value in planing down a few of the rougher edges.

You still seem to be suggesting that the lack of phonetic spelling is a problem. English doesn't have phonetic spelling because it doesn't want it. It's no more a problem that "rough" is pronounced completely differently in "through" and "trough" than it is a problem that the sound at the beginning of the word "the" isn't a 't' followed by an 'h'. Phonetic spelling, especially in a language with as diverse a range of dialect pronunciations as English, is just a complete waste of time, and Webster was simply a misguided fool.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Nantoz

And I do hope you're not talking about the benefits to be had from the overuse of 'like' and 'you know', 'dude', or 'aaaaaaaawesome'.....

Slum, sweatshop, the best thing since sliced bread, tycoon, well-to-do, know-how, living the life of riley, call girl, telephone directory, information, businessman, (Originally existing in Britain, but only entering it’s modern usage in America.), electrocuted, skyscraper, (As with businessman.) cafeteria, atomic bomb, pin-up girl, blackout, shellshock, booby trap, off the record, egghead, (Hi Mark.), grass roots, dark horse (As with businessman), moron, dyed-in-the-wool, to whitewash, movie stars, halitosis, dandruff, photographer, toilet paper, spending spree, frozen foods, hot dog.

Are just a hint of some words or phrases coined in America and which we all find invaluable.

[MrL_JaKiri]

I'm not sure if some of those really count, especially those like "atomic bomb" which aren't really an evolution of language at all, unless you want to count all the other sciencey words that have been added to the lexicon.

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Slum, sweatshop, the best thing since sliced bread, tycoon, well-to-do, know-how, living the life of riley, call girl, telephone directory, information, businessman, (Originally existing in Britain, but only entering it’s modern usage in America.), electrocuted, skyscraper, (As with businessman.) cafeteria, atomic bomb, pin-up girl, blackout, shellshock, booby trap, off the record, egghead, (Hi Mark.), grass roots, dark horse (As with businessman), moron, dyed-in-the-wool, to whitewash, movie stars, halitosis, dandruff, photographer, toilet paper, spending spree, frozen foods, hot dog.

Are just a hint of some words or phrases coined in America and which we all find invaluable.

errr

'invaluable'?

did you actually read them?

[MrL_JaKiri]

"knowledge" was a more common varient.

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

I think the answer is simply that Americans write it the way we say it. We generally* say "September eleventh" so we write it 9/11.


*Sometimes we put the day first when speaking, e.g., 'fourth of July,' but usually only for special dates.

surely this incosistency is indicitive of the criticism europeans feel willing to make of american usage?

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Nantoz

But not the only one?

And they do have somewhat different meanings.

The definiton we know (things like "information content") are very modern.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Nantoz

You're quite right. Life would hardly be worth licing without dandruff sporting well-to-do businessmen taking their call girls on spending sprees. bying whitewash to build an atomic bomb out of toilett paper and hot dogs.

You asked for examples of American words which have entered common British usage. I gave you some as an illustration, in response to your smart-arse implication that all America had added to the language was 'Dude' and suchlike. If you want to continue in this generally non-constructive (Twatish) vein throughout the thread then please, do continue.

Originally Posted by Nantoz

And 'information", truly? Doesn't that have a Latin root? I would have thought the use of 'information' would be ancient in the English language.

AFAIK, the origin of the word is very recent.

Originally Posted by MrL_Jakiri

I'm not sure if some of those really count, especially those like "atomic bomb" which aren't really an evolution of language at all, unless you want to count all the other sciencey words that have been added to the lexicon.

I was presenting new phrases which have been introduced from America, not true 'evolutionary' pieces of language structuring. Sorry for any confusion.

[Marilyn Manson]

The 'best thing since sliced bread', is a very common expression in Britain, particularly amongst (If I may be so bold.) the working class. As a Norwegian, you won't be aware of this, and it's thus a bit of a problem we have here. In this sense I was trying to illustrate that expressions which seem to be inherently British and native can have distant (American) origins, and that Britons are often are not aware of this.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Proteus

You still seem to be suggesting that the lack of phonetic spelling is a problem.

I think Webster did; as for myself I was never a very good speller so I welcome any simplifications.

English doesn't have phonetic spelling because it doesn't want it.

I think it is people that have wants; not languages.

It's no more a problem that "rough" is pronounced completely differently in "through" and "trough" than it is a problem that the sound at the beginning of the word "the" isn't a 't' followed by an 'h'. Phonetic spelling, especially in a language with as diverse a range of dialect pronunciations as English, is just a complete waste of time, and Webster was simply a misguided fool.

I'll be sure to pass that criticism along to him, the next time I see him.

Originally Posted by Yahwe

surely this incosistency is indicitive of the criticism europeans feel willing to make of american usage?

Yes, although it's a rather trivial example in my opinion.

[cressa]

Terrorism is bad MMMKAY !

Neg rep is bad MMKAY !

Trusting a nation who spell colour COLOR is wrong MMMKAY !!!!

I think that covers most of points in this thread

Goodnight

[Message Ends ]