|
26 Apr 04 - 02:24 AM (#1170921) Subject: BS: Brit spelling From: michaelr So why isn't it "sailour"? I'd really like to know. Cheers, Michael |
|
26 Apr 04 - 02:39 AM (#1170927) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Metchosin because it isn't. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 02:51 AM (#1170929) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Metchosin and probably for the same reason that instigator and perpetrator are not instigatour and perpetratour. An instigator instigates, a perpetrator perpetrates, and a sailor sails, while a neighbour doesn't neighb. Actually I don't really know. Sorry. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:02 AM (#1170932) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST More inconsistencies |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:08 AM (#1170936) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Metchosin but it is not inconsitent guest. "or" means "one who", while "our" doesn't. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:13 AM (#1170938) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Metchosin except of course in the case of the word "traitor", who is not one who traits. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:19 AM (#1170940) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST A traditor might be, however |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:19 AM (#1170941) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Metchosin but it is not inconsistant that "our" doesn't mean "one who". |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:23 AM (#1170943) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: mouldy ...and for the same reason it's not sailer, which would refer as verb or adverb to an action, not a person, I suppose. Mind you, in Notts, at least, "neighbour" IS a verb, as in "I don't neighbour," which means that you aren't always popping round next door. When we moved into our last house, the woman next door said that, then added "...but if you need anything, just ask and I'll come". I suppose it's all to do with language roots, and the passage of time, through fashions of speech. (I mean, look what's happening with modern spoken English!) I suppose what you have to remember is that English isn't a pure language, but a cosmopolitan blend from every invader that staked claim to the place, mingled with the spoken language of the indigenous people. The wealth and spread, or conversely preservation, of local dialect is dependent on how far they got, and perhaps how far the resident population moved to get away from them! They say the nearest to the Viking era language is spoken dialectically in the NE, which is logical. I met a Geordie woman a few years ago, who has a pottery business with a Norwegian friend. They found they both used the same or similar dialect words on odd occasions! English has then been exported around the world and evolved further in both spelling and pronounciation by the blending with other languages. (I also heard someone once say that the nearest to the mediaeval style of pronounciation is to be found around Barnsley!) You've only got to link pronounciation to phonetic spelling in the days before Samuel Pepys and his diary, and you have immediately got lots of variations. Then get somebody like Pepys to devise what becomes an "official" version, and that gets gradually imposed over all the others. But that still hasn't sorted out why it's "-or" at the end of words. It just is!!! Andrea |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:25 AM (#1170945) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST demeanour = one who demeans? |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:40 AM (#1170946) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Metchosin a traditor might be, if he truly is viewed as a trader and not just a traitor. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:41 AM (#1170948) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Richard Bridge pronunciation, please. and "adviser" - UK, but "advisor" - US. A lot of these things depend on whether one is speaking English or American. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:42 AM (#1170949) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST What about an author, then |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:48 AM (#1170955) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: John MacKenzie Why don't Americans spell buoy, booee? Whose language is it anyway. ;-) John |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:50 AM (#1170959) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: MudGuard "instigator", "traditor" and "perpetrator" are Latin words for a person who does whatever the corresponding verb ("instigare", "tradire", "perpetrare") means. The "re" of the infinitive form is replaced by "tor" to get the person. "Sailor" is not a Latin word, sail is also not a Latin word ("navigare" is the Latin word for "to sail", and "navigator" is the person - once again it fits...) I am not sure whether this is consistent (my English is not good enough for that) "demeanour", "behaviour" and so on are not words for a person doing something, and they are also not of Latin origin. Just my 2 (Euro-)cents ;-) |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:55 AM (#1170961) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Terry K Andrea, don't forget that Vikings (Norsemen, North Men or Normans) didn't only cross to the North East. There was a mass movement of Norse from Denmark in the year 896 who settled the mouth of the Seine, thus establishing the state of Normandy. Then in 1066....... cheers, Terry |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:23 AM (#1170974) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Dave Hanson The only thing England made a bad job of was teaching the Americans to speak English. eric |
|
26 Apr 04 - 05:10 AM (#1171009) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,noddy What is it a fakir does? |
|
26 Apr 04 - 06:45 AM (#1171054) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Steve Parkes The -or agent-suffix (that is, a bit tacked on the end of a word to mean "somebody who does what the word means") is found on words we got from Latin. The -er agent-suffix (with an "E") is found on words we got from French, where the original -eur has lost its "U". "Neghbour" isn't "one who neighbs", so the spelling doesn't have to follow the same lines. I'll have to look it up to see where it comes from (French, I bet). Steve |
|
26 Apr 04 - 06:49 AM (#1171059) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST What is it a fakir does? Writes political speeches. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 06:50 AM (#1171060) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST Now I suppose if you use the English pronunciation faykir, that's a little joke, but if you use the flat A then it isn't. Fascinating language ain't it? |
|
26 Apr 04 - 12:41 PM (#1171371) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strollin' Johnny Doesn't matter what any foreigner says, the English Language is English, from England, and it's spelt correctly by English people who live in England. All other variations on the spelling of our words are irrelevant and wrong, doesn't matter whether if spelling is illogical - it's correct. It's our language that we lent to you other lot, and we know best. Get used to it. If you don't like it, go and invent your own language. Some of you almost have! LOL!!!! Johnny :0) :0) |
|
26 Apr 04 - 12:42 PM (#1171373) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strollin' Johnny I can spell proper but my grammar's crap - I meant 'whether OUR spelling', not 'whether IF spelling'. Duh! |
|
26 Apr 04 - 12:55 PM (#1171384) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Leadfingers Fakir is NOT an English word - It is Hindi like Bungalow |
|
26 Apr 04 - 12:58 PM (#1171390) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strollin' Johnny 'Bungalow' is an Irish word - invented by two labourers on a building site who decided not to build the second storey, just bung a low roof on it. :0) |
|
26 Apr 04 - 02:36 PM (#1171500) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: John MacKenzie Bungalow is a nick name for GWB, it's because he's got fuck all upstairs. John |
|
26 Apr 04 - 02:51 PM (#1171516) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,MMario if "fakir" isn't an English word - why is it that Merriam-Webster has two definitions for it? (yes - it is DERIVED from the hindi 'fakir') but to say fakir is not English when it has been used for over a hundred years as part of the language ....where is the line drawn? what loanwords from Norman french do we drop? or the german, etc? As someone mentioned above "English" is a patchwork language - I suspect that in many respects it is more a 'pidgin' then a true language... |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:22 PM (#1171544) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strick I worked with a Brit who lived in the US a bit before moving to Canada. His big complaint was that Canadian spelling seemed half and half and was neither here nor there. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:24 PM (#1171546) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,MMario oh dear! how DARE those Canadians develop their own identity culturaly. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:30 PM (#1171555) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Amos English is a melting pot of other languages, perhaps the most international labguage around. Not just because it is used widely but because it draws from so many places. But you have to be conscious of the different threads that go into it -- there are totally different chains of development from the Anglo and Saxon roots, for example than there are from Roman roots such as Spanish and French, and a different set again for Sanskrit or Arabic roots. If you don't take these different streams into account, and expect a foolish homogeniety and consistency in the tongue, it will be a source of endless confusion and frustration to you. A |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:34 PM (#1171557) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strick "oh dear! how DARE those Canadians develop their own identity culturaly." Maybe they should have stuck with French. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:36 PM (#1171561) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: toadfrog Hmm. "Vendor" is one who sells. "Promisor" is one who promises. "Obligor," I guess, is one who obliges. "Payor" normally means a Bank. But a "trustor" is not a person who trusts. I will bet most of you do not use these words. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 03:39 PM (#1171563) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: toadfrog Oh yes, there are "tortfeasors," too! Those guys are all over the place! Do the Brits call them "tortfeasours"? Probably not. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:11 PM (#1171580) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Richard Bridge Actually TF I use most of those. Also mortgagor, and indemnitor. Is Trustor the American for cestui que trust, or settlor? If so he certainly does trust the trustee to impliment the terms of the trust. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:14 PM (#1171584) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,MMario Strick - "maybe they should have stuck with french" - Where would the English be if the Norman's had done this? |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:17 PM (#1171586) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Leadfingers MMario I accept what you say but the thread is reference British spelling and the reason 'fakir'is spelt that way is because it is from Hindi , NO Latin French Greek or even Celtic root !! Pedantry is alive and well in Mudcat !! |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:30 PM (#1171599) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,MMario in other words - some of the "inconsistant" English spellings are due to the fact that the words are derived from other languages. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:55 PM (#1171633) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: weerover In English, a single letter grouping ("...ough...") can be pronounced at least 13 different ways. This may be useful to those who enjoy inventing puns, etc., but I bet it makes it a bugger to learn. wr. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 04:59 PM (#1171639) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strick "Where would the English be if the Norman's had done this?" Working with a more consistent spelling system? |
|
26 Apr 04 - 05:38 PM (#1171668) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Joe_F According to Fowler s.v. -our & -or in Modern English Usage, writers of English on both sides of the pond were gradually abandoning "-our" in favo(u)r of "-or" when the Americans made a clean sweep. The agent nouns went first, so agent nouns in -our are rare even in Britain; according to Fowler, "governour" was the last to go, and only "saviour" & "paviour" remain. Fowler thought that the trend in Britain was arrested by the American move to consistency, so Brits put up with a mixed bag so as to show that they are not Yanks; he mentions e.g. horror, pallor, tremor by the side of favour, ardour, odour, with no rationale he could think of. |
|
26 Apr 04 - 05:57 PM (#1171686) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Shanghaiceltic If someone makes an accusation why can't he/she be called an alligator ;-) |
|
26 Apr 04 - 06:21 PM (#1171708) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Amos LOL!!! ANd if he keeps wiring in to BS, p'rapshe could be a crock'o'dial? A |
|
26 Apr 04 - 06:50 PM (#1171726) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Uncle_DaveO Toadfrog opined: Hmm. "Vendor" is one who sells. "Promisor" is one who promises. "Obligor," I guess, is one who obliges. "Payor" normally means a Bank. But a "trustor" is not a person who trusts. Yes, "vendor" is one who sells--that is, vends. Yes, "promisor" is one who promises, all right. But "obligor" is not one who obliges, but one who is bound to another; that is, he is obliged to render something to another. Then "obligee" is the one who receives the payment or whatever. And "Payor" is not particularly a bank. It is one who pays. It could be a bank, but not "normally". A "trustor" is one who creates a trust. Dave Oesterreich |
|
26 Apr 04 - 07:54 PM (#1171776) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Gray D Oh, for goodness' sake! Amurgen spelling is different to U.K. spelling because the American establishment decided to standardise "their" version some time ago, in much the same way that the British establishment had done to its version some time before. Read Bill Bryson's "Made in America" for further details . . . and get over it. Sheesh . . . Gray D |
|
26 Apr 04 - 10:20 PM (#1171848) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: HuwG However, "Fakir" is spelt, it allowed the writers of "Carry on up the Khyber", the high (low ?) point of the film. In the palace at Jaxi, a fakir (played by Cardew Robertson) is blundering through a stage conjuring act: The Khazi of Kalabar (Kenneth williams) : Get rid of this idiot ! Bring on the dancing girls ! Bungdit Din (Bernard Bresslaw) : Fakir ! Off ! |
|
27 Apr 04 - 03:55 AM (#1171986) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,Boab Strikes me that this thread could be used to prove beyond doubt that computer use really does save paper for better purposes----- |
|
27 Apr 04 - 04:07 AM (#1171999) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,noddy yes Boab you can cut it up into six inch squares and hang it from a nail. |
|
27 Apr 04 - 04:13 AM (#1172006) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: John MacKenzie GHIT spells fish That is if you take 'gh' from rough, and the 'it' from propitious. John |
|
27 Apr 04 - 05:25 AM (#1172044) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Leadfingers Then there was the chap who went to England to improve his English but always had trouble with the words that were spelt the same and pronounced differently or spelt differently and pronounced the same. One evening he was walking through the West End of London when he saw a poster outside a theatre that said "CATS" - Pronounced Success ! At which point he gave up and went home. |
|
27 Apr 04 - 07:11 AM (#1172100) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Hrothgar "the nearest to the mediaeval style of pronounciation is to be found around Barnsley" Barnsley pronunciation might be close to mediaeval pronunciation - but it's a long way from anything else! |
|
27 Apr 04 - 08:04 AM (#1172150) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strollin' Johnny GHOTI also spells fish. GH as in rough O as in women TI as in nation Just thought I tell you..........back to me cave! Johnny :0) |
|
27 Apr 04 - 10:21 AM (#1172263) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Sandra in Sydney The Tough Coughs as He Ploughs the Dough - Early Writings & Cartoons by Dr Suess (NY, 1987), one of my favourite books. |
|
27 Apr 04 - 05:03 PM (#1172658) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Nigel Parsons Giok: GHOTI spells Fish, GH as in cough, O as in women, TI as in nation (popularly attributed to George Bernard Shaw) see here Nigel |
|
27 Apr 04 - 07:26 PM (#1172773) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Bill D The wind was rough, And could and blough. She kept her hands Inside her mough. (actually, the real reason for spelling differences is that in the early days of the USA, we were just poor ex-colonists, and couldn't afford all that extra ink required to print the 'extra' letters that the Brits stuff into so many words. We saved a fortune shortening them...*grin*) |
|
28 Apr 04 - 07:51 AM (#1173106) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Ringer I think it was Cardew Robinson, HuwG (your post 26 Apr 04 - 10:20 PM). (Proving that pedantry is not yet dead.) |
|
29 Apr 04 - 06:25 AM (#1173904) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: s&r If you have problems with standard English spelling, try some dialect . This is a link to some examples of Lancashire dialect verse |
|
29 Apr 04 - 07:19 AM (#1173936) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: GUEST,John O'Lennaine I don't know if it's true or not, but I was told that the American spelling is the way the English spelled things when America became an English colony. In the intervening years the English got more and more up themselves and Francicised their spelling to prove it. It's silly to argue about which is more correct, but if the above is true then the American spelling is probably more English. John |
|
29 Apr 04 - 07:28 AM (#1173941) Subject: RE: BS: Brit spelling From: Strollin' Johnny Nigel - I already said that. Plagiarist! :0) |