A common language to divide us
-
The company I used to work for had a guideline that said all documents must be written in British English. It was so harshly phrased you thought you'd burn in hell if you used US English. The paragraph describing this guideline contained at least 3 words written in US English :omg:
Kitty at my foot and I waAAAant to touch it...
Power Puff Boy wrote:
It was so harshly phrased you thought you'd burn in hell if you used US English.
Did it say "It is strongly advised that documents should be written in British English". Anything stronger than that is hyperbole.
KeithBarrow.net[^] - It might not be very good, but at least it is free!
-
Power Puff Boy wrote:
It was so harshly phrased you thought you'd burn in hell if you used US English.
Did it say "It is strongly advised that documents should be written in British English". Anything stronger than that is hyperbole.
KeithBarrow.net[^] - It might not be very good, but at least it is free!
Keith Barrow wrote:
Anything stronger than that is hyperbole
Is that better or worse than parabole? :rimshot:
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Mark_Wallace wrote:
At the same time, though, "Villa are my favourite football team" and "Villa is my favorite soccer team" are both just so incredibly wrong, because Villa's cr@p.
Oi! We're not cr@p, we've just been slightly out of form for a few years.
PeejayAdams wrote:
Oi! We're not cr@p, we've just been slightly out of form for a few years.
OK, OK, I'll at least admit that your pitch is superb. Mind you, the amount of dung that's spread on it every weekend, that's not surprising.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Power Puff Boy wrote:
It was so harshly phrased you thought you'd burn in hell if you used US English.
Did it say "It is strongly advised that documents should be written in British English". Anything stronger than that is hyperbole.
KeithBarrow.net[^] - It might not be very good, but at least it is free!
Sorry, but I can't remember the exact words. One thing I do remember is that some of it was WRITTEN IN CAPITOL LETTERS. When people do that then they're really serious about it, no matter how stupid the guideline.
Kitty at my foot and I waAAAant to touch it...
-
Keith Barrow wrote:
Anything stronger than that is hyperbole
Is that better or worse than parabole? :rimshot:
Software Zen:
delete this;That really deserves a rimshot.
Kitty at my foot and I waAAAant to touch it...
-
I've just noticed that where I work has an Item Enquiry screen that calls an Item Inquiry service. I believe that in current British English usage that is correct however I believe the reason for its being is that the screen was created by Brits and the service by Europeans.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
Read this loud:
Quote:
English Is Tough Stuff Dearest creature in creation, Study English pronunciation. I will teach you in my verse Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse. I will keep you, Cindy, busy, Make your head with heat grow dizzy. Tear in eye, your dress will tear. So shall I! Oh hear my prayer. Just compare heart, beard, and heard, Dies and diet, lord and word, Sword and sward, retain and Britain. ( Mind the latter, how it's written. ) Now I surely will not plague you With such words as plaque and ague. But be careful how you speak: Say break and steak, but bleak and streak; Cloven, oven, how and low, Script, receipt, show, poem, and toe. Hear me say, devoid of trickery, Daughter, laughter, and Terpsichore, Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles, Exiles, similes, and reviles; Scholar, vicar, and cigar, Solar, mica, war and far; One, anemone, Balmoral, Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel; Gertrude, German, wind and mind, Scene, Melpomene, mankind. Billet does not rhyme with ballet, Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet. Blood and flood are not like food, Nor is mould like should and would. Viscous, viscount, load and broad, Toward, to forward, to reward. And your pronunciation's OK When you correctly say croquet, Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve, Friend and fiend, alive and live. Ivy, privy, famous; clamour And enamour rhyme with hammer. River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb, Doll and roll and some and home. Stranger does not rhyme with anger, Neither does devour with clangour. Souls but foul, haunt but aunt, Font, front, wont, want, grand, and grant, Shoes, goes, does. Now first say finger, And then singer, ginger, linger, Real, zeal, mauve, gauze, gouge and gauge, Marriage, foliage, mirage, and age. Query does not rhyme with very, Nor does fury sound like bury. Dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth. Job, nob, bosom, transom, oath. Though the differences seem little, We say actual but victual. Refer does not rhyme with deafer. Foeffer does, and zephyr, heifer. Mint, pint, senate and sedate; Dull, bull, and George ate late. Scenic, Arabic, Pacific, Science, conscience, scientific. Liberty, library, heave and heaven, Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven. We say hallowed, but allowed, People, leopard, towed, but vowed. Mark the differences, moreover, Between mover, cover, clover; Leeches, breeches, wise, precise, Chalice, but police and lice; Camel, constable, unstable, Principle, disciple,
-
PeejayAdams wrote:
I hate to say it, but I do think that the language is gradually drifting towards the American version
Odd that you fear that, US english is just an older form of English that split off (and stayed fossilised as off shoots tend to) in the 17th century. By the way, Enquire and Ensure were invented in the UK around 1840 ish. If you read Trolope for example you will see him use them the old, and American, way.
Like the English use knives and forks at the same time, but at the time of the split, that technique hadn't come into fashion. [^]
-
Mark_Wallace wrote:
At the same time, though, "Villa are my favourite football team" and "Villa is my favorite soccer team" are both just so incredibly wrong, because Villa's cr@p.
Oi! We're not cr@p, we've just been slightly out of form for a few years.
I'm not a football fan, so I can't pass comment, other than to say I was brought up the other side of Aston Park to the Villa ground, and well remember hearing the roar of the crowd every other Saturday - loudest of course when Villa scored a goal. And I can still see Aston Church from where I live now.
-
As an Englishman, I hate to say it, but I do think that the language is gradually drifting towards the American version. I often hear younger devs talking about dee-em-zees rather than dee-em-zeds these days and the practice of sticking a zed where an ess should be (organize etc.) seems to be growing.
We are the Americans. You WILL be assimilated. Resistance is futile. ;P
-
I've just noticed that where I work has an Item Enquiry screen that calls an Item Inquiry service. I believe that in current British English usage that is correct however I believe the reason for its being is that the screen was created by Brits and the service by Europeans.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
I run a website called "NJTheater.com", and I'm constantly have the remind those artsy-fartsy actors that it's not NJTHeatre.com, "because this is AMERICA, DAMMIT!"
Truth, James
-
My (Dutch) team decided to standardize on British English. That didn't work out so well for our Organization entity. The Initialisation function is fine though :) I admit I find it difficult sometimes. I know color and colour, but who uses center and centre? I guess I could use some counseling and counselling so I may cast a better judgment and judgement. I my defense and defence, English isn't my first language so you can't expect me to memorize and memorise all the differences. So don't criticize and critizise, because for a non-native English speaker I'm pretty skillful and skilful. Of course, I always welcome dialog and dialogue on the subject :)
Read my (free) ebook Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly. Visit my blog at Sander's bits - Writing the code you need. Or read my articles here on CodeProject.
Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. — Edsger W. Dijkstra
Regards, Sander
-
I run a website called "NJTheater.com", and I'm constantly have the remind those artsy-fartsy actors that it's not NJTHeatre.com, "because this is AMERICA, DAMMIT!"
Truth, James
My brother-in-law is an English teacher at a local university here in Kuala Lumpur. He has to know the names of every structure in the language and I have difficulty understanding what he is talking about when he discusses them. It seems far too technical and I feel very sorry for his students whose natural language is either Malay or Chinese. And, guess what, the biggest sticking point is differentiating between British English and American English.
We're philosophical about power outages here. A.C. come, A.C. go.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Odd that you fear that, US english is just an older form of English that split off (and stayed fossilised as off shoots tend to) in the 17th century.
To a large extent, yes, it was a natural branching though I suspect that Webster created a few more differences than would have occurred naturally. I have nothing whatsoever against American English and I'm a huge fan of American literature. I'd also be the first to point out that American English gets many things right that British English gets wrong. I think that much of the reason that I don't want to see the two merge back into one is that I enjoy the differences.
OMG this has been a great thread. As an American with some friends all over the world, I was commenting on someones English and how Americans LOVE the accent... And the person I was with was somewhat offended that the person speaking was a horrible example (I forgot the regional reference they made), but they felt their "proper" way of speaking sounded so much better (er, proper). And your proper reference brought that back. My wife is European, and she listens to someone speak and she just "knows" (She never confuses Australian, English/Britian, English/Elsewhere) unless they are just not fluent. I sit back and think "Not American English... Right? Right?" LOL
-
Like the English use knives and forks at the same time, but at the time of the split, that technique hadn't come into fashion. [^]
Isnt that odd? Just why do Americans do that. Transferring the fork to the right hand to eat after having used it in the left to help cut up the food. Very bizarre!
-
Read this loud:
Quote:
English Is Tough Stuff Dearest creature in creation, Study English pronunciation. I will teach you in my verse Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse. I will keep you, Cindy, busy, Make your head with heat grow dizzy. Tear in eye, your dress will tear. So shall I! Oh hear my prayer. Just compare heart, beard, and heard, Dies and diet, lord and word, Sword and sward, retain and Britain. ( Mind the latter, how it's written. ) Now I surely will not plague you With such words as plaque and ague. But be careful how you speak: Say break and steak, but bleak and streak; Cloven, oven, how and low, Script, receipt, show, poem, and toe. Hear me say, devoid of trickery, Daughter, laughter, and Terpsichore, Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles, Exiles, similes, and reviles; Scholar, vicar, and cigar, Solar, mica, war and far; One, anemone, Balmoral, Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel; Gertrude, German, wind and mind, Scene, Melpomene, mankind. Billet does not rhyme with ballet, Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet. Blood and flood are not like food, Nor is mould like should and would. Viscous, viscount, load and broad, Toward, to forward, to reward. And your pronunciation's OK When you correctly say croquet, Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve, Friend and fiend, alive and live. Ivy, privy, famous; clamour And enamour rhyme with hammer. River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb, Doll and roll and some and home. Stranger does not rhyme with anger, Neither does devour with clangour. Souls but foul, haunt but aunt, Font, front, wont, want, grand, and grant, Shoes, goes, does. Now first say finger, And then singer, ginger, linger, Real, zeal, mauve, gauze, gouge and gauge, Marriage, foliage, mirage, and age. Query does not rhyme with very, Nor does fury sound like bury. Dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth. Job, nob, bosom, transom, oath. Though the differences seem little, We say actual but victual. Refer does not rhyme with deafer. Foeffer does, and zephyr, heifer. Mint, pint, senate and sedate; Dull, bull, and George ate late. Scenic, Arabic, Pacific, Science, conscience, scientific. Liberty, library, heave and heaven, Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven. We say hallowed, but allowed, People, leopard, towed, but vowed. Mark the differences, moreover, Between mover, cover, clover; Leeches, breeches, wise, precise, Chalice, but police and lice; Camel, constable, unstable, Principle, disciple,
I am surprised how long the discussion went on before "English is tough stuff" was brought up! For more than thirty years, I have been handing out this poem to numerous native English speaker, and most of them end up laughing too much to complete the reading of it. I have also met a few who read it without any stumbling at all over spellings and pronounciation. Those are the people who didn't learn the letters in grade school: From day one, they learned to read words, as single symbols, almost like Chinese pictograms. Each word identifies a given concept, and the name of that concept has a certain pronounciation, irrespective of the individual pen strokes making up the word. Not until much later will the kids learn to break the word symbol into separate components (letters), to enable them to 'decode' unknown word symbols they might encounter, and to understand how to create a composite word symbol for a concept you know the name of, but haven't learned the word symbol for. Obviously, first grade kids are not introduced to 'concepts' (i.e. the concept of a concept) as such: that is an just academic way of desribing the idea behind. I must admit that I am somewhat fascinated by the idea: Even though a 'concept' is far more abstract than the physical pen strokes, the kid knows very well the concept of, say, an 'apple'. Mapping the 'apple' concept to some (language dependent) pronounced name is an abstraction that the kid usually can handle. Then we break up that sound into another, rather unrelated, concept of small pieces called 'letters' having no direct connection to the apple concept - that is non-trivial! And then these letter concepts are mapped to a graphical representation which is quite independent of the letter concept: The concept of an 'A' can be represented as 'A' or 'a' (in any of ten thousand typefaces), or as the bit pattern 01000001 or 01100001, or as .- (morse), or as the upper left dot in a 2 by 3 matrix (braille)... For a kid to learn to write, the graphical A or a must be further broken sown into separate strokes, and then the kid must learn the fine motor skills to hold a pencil/pen and form these strokes. Learning the word symbol for the concept is a much simpler task! Note that most schools teaching reading by word symbols rather than by letters also hold back the writing till after the kids are reasonably familiar with the word symbols. Usually, they start breaking composite words into individual simple words, such as 'grandmother' is composed of 'grand' and 'mot
