Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I have been wondering for a while why americans/america call and spell stuff differently from the UK.
For example GREY=GRAY and SOCCER=FOOTBALL...so why do you/americans spell and name stuff differently?

We won the war.

Because 'MURICA that's why.

America passed legislation to simplify the spellings of some words. Hence "color" rather than colour. This means that legally speaking, neither American nor British English are wrong on some words.

Remember! Aluminum!

Because the Brits are wrong.

 4oursword wrote:
America passed legislation to simplify the spellings of some words. Hence "color" rather than colour. This means that legally speaking, neither American nor British English are wrong on some words.

Legislation for spelling? Thats absurd even for us.... it was the original webster dictionary that simplified many of the words into their now"american" spelling

Apparently it has to do with the two big dictionaries published at the time, due to spelling not being standardised back in the day

So it goes, the one in England spelt one the way it is now for England and Commonwealth countries and the one in America spelt it the way Americans do now.

They are just regional differences. Every language that is spoken in multiple regions/countries has them.

Our language, you ruined it.

Eldercaveman wrote:
Our language, you ruined it.

It's not your language, you just use it. It doesn't belong to anybody.

 Krellnus wrote:
Apparently it has to do with the two big dictionaries published at the time, due to spelling not being standardised back in the day

So it goes, the one in England spelt one the way it is now for England and Commonwealth countries and the one in America spelt it the way Americans do now.

This.

Also Webster was an Anglophobe apparently, so he just spelt stuff differently for the sake of it.

I'll get more information when I'm within reach of the book I have which details this, but I believe it was legislation. Might just have been a standarised agreement.

 4oursword wrote:
I'll get more information when I'm within reach of the book I have which details this, but I believe it was legislation. Might just have been a standarised agreement.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't legislation, at least on our side of the pond. It wouldn't make sense, as we have no official language.

If you have evidence to the contrary I'd be interested in seeing it though.

 Skarwael wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
Apparently it has to do with the two big dictionaries published at the time, due to spelling not being standardised back in the day

So it goes, the one in England spelt one the way it is now for England and Commonwealth countries and the one in America spelt it the way Americans do now.

This.

Also Webster was an Anglophobe apparently, so he just spelt stuff differently for the sake of it.

Was it Webster that was the American one? It has been a while since I read up on this.

 Krellnus wrote:

 Skarwael wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
Apparently it has to do with the two big dictionaries published at the time, due to spelling not being standardised back in the day

So it goes, the one in England spelt one the way it is now for England and Commonwealth countries and the one in America spelt it the way Americans do now.

This.

Also Webster was an Anglophobe apparently, so he just spelt stuff differently for the sake of it.

Was it Webster that was the American one? It has been a while since I read up on this.

Yep, Noah Webster.

 Skarwael wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:

 Skarwael wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
Apparently it has to do with the two big dictionaries published at the time, due to spelling not being standardised back in the day

So it goes, the one in England spelt one the way it is now for England and Commonwealth countries and the one in America spelt it the way Americans do now.

This.

Also Webster was an Anglophobe apparently, so he just spelt stuff differently for the sake of it.

Was it Webster that was the American one? It has been a while since I read up on this.

Yep, Noah Webster.

Thought so, you wouldn't happen to recall who the English one was would you? I believe it was Oxford, but I'm not 100% on that.

"Two nations divided by one language." Variously attributed to Winston Churchill, Bernard Shaw, and Oscar Wilde.

English spelling didn't even start to be standardised until Samuel Johnson's dictionary, the first with quotes to illustrate usage, in the 1760s.

 Krellnus wrote:

 Skarwael wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:

 Skarwael wrote:

 Krellnus wrote:
Apparently it has to do with the two big dictionaries published at the time, due to spelling not being standardised back in the day

So it goes, the one in England spelt one the way it is now for England and Commonwealth countries and the one in America spelt it the way Americans do now.

This.

Also Webster was an Anglophobe apparently, so he just spelt stuff differently for the sake of it.

Was it Webster that was the American one? It has been a while since I read up on this.

Yep, Noah Webster.

Thought so, you wouldn't happen to recall who the English one was would you? I believe it was Oxford, but I'm not 100% on that.

Samuel Johnson.

I was born in the same town as him!

Was really only that recently?
That's surprising.

Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "If it sounds right on paper" doesn't it?

Webster was an anglophobe, but he was also a American utopian. This led him to arguing that words and their proper spelling shouldn't be derived from an obscure understanding of latin and greek roots, but should be straightforward, and a source of empowerment to the people through simpler education. So, over the course of many editions he basically just changed the spellings of words to get rid of the silly, fussy little rules, like c being used even though the sound is a soft s, like in defence/defense, and the silent you that sometimes sits between o and r, like in colour/color.

And what's really funny is that on the face of it, I'd have to say I'm completely on Webster's side, because there's nothing to be gained by filling language up with obscure contradictions based on root languages that hardly any native speakers are versed in at all. And yet I still get a little annoyed everytime I see 'color', 'defense' etc

That reminds me of the Shaw Alphabet, where George Bernarnd Shaw attempted to create a new alphabet that assigned each unique sound, shame the idea never really caught on, maybe then, we wouldn't have all of these endless flame wars over spelling on youtube...

Others have covered the spelling.

Languages develop over time and aquire words of indigunous people to suit, so Australian and American english have words that are not english.

When a country is colonized (by white europeans) and when it breaks from the mother country to a certain degree dictates the language variations. American english starts with 16th century english and ends with 18th century english. After then it starts to develop in its own direction, while the mother tongue develops in a different way, changing some words, developing different meanings or dropping words.

Originally many of the american words are the old english ones with the original meanings.

Besides it would spoil the fun of telling an American you've been out in to town in your shorts, and there be a different mental image

Fanny pack is another good one.

In the English speaking world, the fanny is the 'front bum'.

Pants v trousers.
Loudspeaker v Tannoy (more of a generic v trademark product name than anything else - like 'kleenex' v 'tissue' or 'esky' v 'cooler').

 Hordini wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:
Our language, you ruined it.

It's not your language, you just use it. It doesn't belong to anybody.

Sorry I forgot the quote marks, it's from a jimmy Carr live set, during being heckled by an American.

The only one that really riles me up is
'potato chips' to mean 'crisps' (as in cheetos, pringles, walkers ready salted etc)

Mainly because when I was 6 I went to Disneyworld in Orlando, and upon arriving in the airport stateside, being hungry, my family found (what I think was a bar) in the airport, and I asked with rumbling stomach and childlike enthusiam for a plate of chips (bear in mind that my parents at no point bothered to explain to me the different us/uk lingo, and thought it best just to sit back and enjoy the situation). With a look of bamboozlement upon his face, the guy behind the bar did dutifully fulfil my request, and provided me with an unopened bag of crisps.

On a plate...

 Seaward wrote:
We won the war.

you say 'war', I say 'troubles in the colonies'.

 chromedog wrote:
Fanny pack is another good one.

In the English speaking world, the fanny is the 'front bum'.

Pants v trousers.
Loudspeaker v Tannoy (more of a generic v trademark product name than anything else - like 'kleenex' v 'tissue' or 'esky' v 'cooler').

Rubber is another one. Our rubbers in the uk are american erasers. I'm told rubber means something quite different over the pond.

PredaKhaine wrote:

 chromedog wrote:
Fanny pack is another good one.

In the English speaking world, the fanny is the 'front bum'.

Pants v trousers.
Loudspeaker v Tannoy (more of a generic v trademark product name than anything else - like 'kleenex' v 'tissue' or 'esky' v 'cooler').

Rubber is another one. Our rubbers in the uk are american erasers. I'm told rubber means something quite different over the pond.

And aaaall the way over the pond, they mean both! How interesting