BS: Tech US to UK English advice please

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: ClaireBear
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 03:31 PM

Hmmm, my understanding of the which/that issue in UK English (unlike American English, which uses the rule you cited) is that one uses "which" to identify the subject of the phrase/clause that follows, and "that" to identify its object, as:

"The apples which lie on the table"

vs.

"The apples that I found"

Is the above no longer true?

Claire

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: GUEST, Topsie
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 03:10 PM

Claire, some UK publishers prefer a serial comma (sometimes referred to as the 'Oxford comma') and others don't. Others still are happy to follow the author's preference, so long as it is consistent throughout the book or article.
The same applies to -ise/-ize, though -ize is becoming more common. There are some words that always use -ise, but I think the only word that always uses -ize is 'galvanize' (but I could be wrong about that). Beware of 'analyse' and 'paralyse', which are always 's' in UK English but can have a 'z' in American.
On hyphens the rule is to be consistent, but watch out for ambiguity: 'recreation' and 're-creation', or 'the dark-blue sea' and the dark, blue sea'.
On which or that, the presence or absence of a comma is the important thing: there is a difference between 'government officials who are corrupt ... ' = just the corrupt ones, and 'government officials, who are corrupt ...' = they are all corrupt. The same rule applies to which/that, who, and when, but usually you would use 'which' after a comma and 'that' when there is no comma, as in 'the wind that shakes the barley'.
On quotation marks and punctuation, US practice is easier - all commas and full points go inside; in the UK they go inside only if what is inside the quotation marks is a proper sentence starting with a capital letter.
I hope that helps and isn't too confusing.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: ClaireBear
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 02:25 PM

I have it at my desk, McGrath, and despite its occasional inaccuracies it is indeed quite helpful, comma-wise.

The example a friend once gave me for why serial commas may be a good idea runs as follows:

"I would like to thank my parents, God and Ayn Rand."

Cheers,
Claire

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 02:17 PM

Have you come across Lynne Truss's book Eats, Shoots and Leaves, Claire?

It was a Christmas bestseller last year, and is great fun, but also quite helpful in stuff like variable use of commas. (That website will let you see if you're likely to agree with that.)

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: ClaireBear
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 02:09 PM

Thurg, thanks for reminding me about the 1999 Fowler's; I think I have that stashed away somewhere!

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: ClaireBear
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 02:06 PM

I am delighted to see that this thread has prospered while I was away sleeping.

I can see that I have not explained my position thoroughly. I am not a writer; I am an editor/proofreader by trade who writes, and given the proper tools I am confident I can do this job adequately. (And Liz, never fear, what I do with my day is convert techspeak to English!)

Another fact I omitted: I don't work for the tech firm in question, I work for an a small agency that has a goodly chunk of the firm's marketng communications business. The firm has enough confidence in our work to trust me to take on their style guide project (which is nearing 200 pages and has many more to go).

Unfortunately, we haven't the resources to take on more staff -- although we do have one English employee in another office whose acquaintance I plan to make before this project is completed. We've already asked the firm to supply us with the resources they use, but all they did was point me to some publicly available (and rather flawed) Web resources. I can do better than that!

Thank you very kindly for all your information. I rather imagine that, if there were one "right" resource to consult, someone would have mentioned it by now. The fact that no one has done so leads me to believe that, at least, I am not missing the obvious. And I had already included all the facts you've collectively detailed above in my guide, which gives me some additional comfort.

By the way, the words the Chambers dictionary "zeddifies" (and BTW AskOxford, the online Oxford Compact, seems to agree) include "organise" and "realise." The "-ise" spellings are listed as secondary. Do those of you who speak UK English think this is correct? I'm quite sure I've seen documents coming out of the firm's European offices that spell both of these with "-ise."

JohninKansas, I had also thought to reset the language in Word, and that helped some...but as McGrath points out, the UK English setting will accept both spellings of many words. I have no problem spotting and correcting what I know are homonyms in AmSpeak but not necessarily in UK English (tire and tire/tyre, pry and pry/prise...), but it is rather frustrating not to be able to have confidence that Word is flagging the Americanisms I don't know about.

I'm also concerned about differences that have nothing to do with spelling, examples of which include the non-use of serial commas, the addition of hyphens after prefixes in many places where we would not use them, the which/that controversy, and the different approach to the use of quotation marks. All of these are included in the guide already, and I think I understand them fairly well...the trouble is, as one American poet (give the link a minute to load; there's a splash page first) whose backside I am happy to see exiting the halls of power so eloquently put it:

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

- D.H. Rumsfeld

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 01:54 PM

So the idea was that you should keep the "to" next to the verb and treat it all as one without splitting it - sort of pretending it was all one word, and therefore it couldn't be split. Except that's not the way English really works.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: GUEST, Topsie
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 01:40 PM

Exactly, Snuffy, you don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Snuffy
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 01:25 PM

How do you split a a Latin infinitive?

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 01:22 PM

Les implies that being relaxed about the use of split infinitives is a modern development. The truth is - as forcefully recognised by "the original Fowlers" back in the 1920s - split infinitives as such have always been perfectly acceptable English. The point is to avoid using them in such a way as to lose clarity or read clumsily. And there is no difference between American English and English English in this respect.

"A real split infinitive, though not desirable in itself, is preferable to either of two things, to real ambiguity and to patent artificiality."

(And HW Fowler himself all those years ago wasn't too impressed with "the Victorian grammarians" either, especially the ones who thought that the rules worked out for Latin grammar should apply to English, which is where the fetish about split infinitives has its origins.)

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: GUEST,thurg
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 12:24 PM

You might want to get ahold of the 1999 version of Fowler's Modern English Usage (Oxford), which bears only a nebulous relationship to the original Fowler's but which has much info. on Brit vs. Yank English. It's edited by one Robert Allen; his grasp of the subtleties of North American English is a little slippery, but I think it's safe to assume that he would not have gotten the job if he didn't have a pretty good handle on standard British English. Also, he's not overly impressed with the Victorian grammarians (which is to say, he's not one of those who believe that all the grammar they were taught in school is necessarily correct. Note: that's those who believe, not those who believes!).

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: OtherDave
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 10:05 AM

Gurney's comment above almost certainly refers to Pedro Carolino, who produced The New Guide of the Conversation in Portuguese and English in the mid 1880s. An American edition, with an introduction by Mark Twain, appeared in 1883.

Carolino didn't himself speak English; he appears to have had a Portuguese-French dictionary and an English-French dictionary, through both of which he dragged his thoughts.

Dover Press, bless them, reprinted most of this wonderful nonsense as "Fractured English as She is Spoke," though that seems to be out of print.

As the preface says, "A choice of familiar dialogues, clean of gallicisms, and despoiled phrases, it was missing yet to studious portuguese and brazilian Youth; and also to persons of others nations, that wish to know the portuguese language. We sought all we may do, to correct that want....without to acch us selves (as make some others) almost at a literal translation..."

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: GUEST,...
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 10:03 AM

My 'Shorter' (2 volumes) Oxford Dictionary uses -ize, which is useful for checking the words that have to use -ise. These are usually those ending with -vise, words to do with seeing, such as supervise and televise, or -cise, words to do with cutting, such as incise.
I generally find the Longmans dictionaries useful for pointing out UK/US variations.
What is important is to be consistent. For any piece of writing, where a word can be spelled in more than one way, decide which spelling you are going to use, and stick to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 09:16 AM

Some of us would prefer to end a sentence, rather than a sentance, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Les from Hull
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 09:08 AM

Part of the problem is that language is constantly changing. And under the careful attention of Microsoft, it's probably changing faster than some of us like.

For instance, I would always use the -ise rather than -ize, but other changes from what I was taught at school I can readily accept. To casually split an infinitive is no problem to me, neither do I bother what I end a sentance with. The way that compound nouns start with two words, gain a hyphen and then end up as one word travels at different speeds for different people.

So it's not just UK Technical English. It's UK Technical English to suit a particular group. The best advice I could give would be to allow feedback so that anyone who is really bothered about what they read can contact you. But in my experience people with 'technical' somewhere in their job specification are slightly less worried about the style of what they read than others. I had the job of teaching some of these people how to write in plain English, and it seemed that not many of them were really that bothered.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: GUEST, Topsie
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 08:33 AM

and I really should have proofread my post before I submitted it!

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: GUEST, Topsie
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 08:32 AM

If you want to find a proffessional proofreader, the British

Society of Freelance Editors and Proofreaders

have an online directory.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 03:28 AM

Spare a passing thought for the 'Clear English' campaign too - the quest to eradicate jargon and unnecessary over-egging of the pudding to the extent that the simple printed instructions for erecting a Swedish flatpack furniture store caffitiere storage unit become so unreadable (as opposed to illegible) that the customer is left in some considerable doubt as to whether screw A goes in slot B or whether they should just physically manhandle the object into the refuse department of the most conveniently juxtaposed Civic Amenity site or appropriate container.

OK?

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 03:24 AM

PPS - I do 'Australian English' - which does not mean including rude words :-) but is much closer to UK English (as we were taught in school) than US English.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 03:21 AM

If there's payment involved, please contact me

Robin
(Wordsmith)

P.S. I do this sort of thing for free for friends, but if a commercial entity wants it, then us unemployed really don't want to give it away for free... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Rasener
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 03:01 AM

I take that back. Most of her contacts are project managers. Sorry about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Rasener
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 02:54 AM

My wifes a freelance translator, but translates from English to Dutch for top translation companies and has been doing that for the last 30 years.
However she does have contact with very good professional translators/proofreaders who work freelance.
Its very important to get it proofread as what goes out is all about your company. It can either look good or bad and can send the wrong message out about your company.

If you would like her to recommend somebody, then please let me know.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 02:29 AM

Agreed you need a native English speaker. You need an educated one with a familiarity with the subject matter. You will still be left with infelicities in the final result. I did French-English translation about fluid control valves for Elliot-Automation in Alsace decades ago, I met all the criteria, and I could still see problems with the result, but not find acceptable ways to remedy them.

Under NO circumstances trust Microsnot to achieve a result that is (a) accurate or (b) English.

Part of the problem is that there are, regrettably, many English speakers, some educated, who seem happy with what other English speakers will regard as utter solecisms. Examples are split infinitives, "try and" in stead of "try to" and numbers of "alternatives" that exceed two.

The English usage of "which" and "that" also differs from the AAmerican, but although I feel the difference when I see it, I am not sure that I could enunciate a rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 11 Nov 06 - 01:33 AM

If you're working for business publication, it would be considered "good practice" to have someone other than the author, or in this case the translator, to do a proof reading just to catch the typos and other "little things" that creep in. In your case, finding a proofer who's experienced with UK English would be the obvious way of getting a good UK-English text.

Many very good "proofers" work freelance, and you can work via email with them. Finding a good one may take a bit of work, but the benefit to be had can be well worth it. In your case you'd have the little extra of finding a "Brit" proofer, but it shouldn't really be too difficult. A quick Google for "proofreader" might indicate whether there's a handy covey of them somewhere in your region. You might find someone via a search for "Temporary Employment" agencies, but some of these have a tendency to "promise everything" regardless of the skills or lack thereof of the people they offer.

Many of the major publishing companies keep a roster of freelancers, and usually are willing to share recommendations, since it's to their own advantage to keep their best ones occupied (and happy) when they don't have work of their own for them.

In my own area, I'd probably just drop in at the overpriced "atmosphere" pub where all the green card Brits hang out and ask if one has a wife (with her own greencard?) who'd be interested, ... (in proofreading) ... maybe.

Using a separate proofer in no way denigrates the author. It's a mark of professional work that your business should be willing, if not eager, to use.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: Gurney
Date: 10 Nov 06 - 11:21 PM

Bite the bullet and hire a Pom to proofread before publication. Most English/Aussie/Kiwi speakers can understand American English easily enough, so an English-English specialist should have no trouble. You could strike trouble with technical and chemical terms (Methylated Spirit is a denatured alchohol, but is it Denatured Alchohol?).

Have you heard the story about the Portugese who published an English-language guide to Portugal? Unfortunately, he didn't speak English, but he did have a Portugese-French dictionary and a French-English dictionary.....

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 06 - 09:01 PM

The thing is, people here are accustomed to having stuff about computers written in America-speak, and don't have much trouble in understanding it. And there are some cases where the American spelling has become the accepted one in that context, even in English.

For example "program" meaning computer program is now seen as the correct spelling, even though "programme" is correct spelling in all other contexts. For example, we'd watch TV programmes, and but a programme when we went to the theatre.

That kind of thing means that spell checkers aren't necessarily too reliable. The one I'm using at present recognises both "program" and "programme" as valid spellings - but of course gives no indication of when they are correct and when they are wrong.

And that unreliability of spell-checkers as a guide to correct spelling applies to a lot of other words as well. For example, there are many words where "ce" and "se" are both correct - but they mean something different (eg licence and license). Again a word like "tire" is perfectly good (non-American) English for what happens when you get exhausted, but it wouldn't be right for the "tyre" on the wheel of a car.

Subject: RE: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 10 Nov 06 - 08:25 PM

One simple thing you can consider is setting the "correct" language in Word and running spell check. There is a choice between US or UK English there, and when set in Word the setting is applied to all other Microsoft Office programs. When you set a new language, spellcheck should switch automatically to using the appropriate dictionary. As there's lots of crossbreeding/inbreeding between the languages, I can't say how strictly the associated dictionaries will distinguish between the two languages.

You may have to reinsert your installation disk the first time you change to a new language, but once installed the language choice should choose the appropriate dictionary for the spell check.

Note that there is some difference in keyboards as well, and you may find things "in the wrong place" if you don't switch back to the language that matches your keyboard.

In Word, "Tools|Language|Set Language."

There are a number of other things that can be set to be more appropriate to the particular language, with the most basic entries at "Options," some additional possibly at "Customize," and likely some in "AutoCorrect."

A "sort of" definitive reference is Developing International Software, Second Edition
Author: Dr. International   
Pages: 1104
Disk: 1 Companion CD
Level: All Levels
Published 10/09/2002
ISBN 0-7356-1583-7

(For those who might look at the link, it's to http;//thesource.ofallevil.com - and it is a Microsoft site. Links to discount sellers are provided for this book [not exactly a best seller].)

I doubt this book would be of a great lot of help in your task, since it does deal primarily with software, but the really desparate might find some help with getting the software they might need for using some of the features available in standard Windows/Office.

John

Subject: BS: Tech US to UK English advice please
From: ClaireBear
Date: 10 Nov 06 - 06:03 PM

As part of creating a new corporate style guide for a major worldwide tech company, I am tasked with creating a guide to converting documents from U.S. English (in which this company produces its documents [and in which I write]) to UK English (which is preferred by many of the company's sales regions).

I have found many vocabulary/spelling/punctuation/syntax conversion sites online, but all the ones I've found either do what appears to be a very good job on the UK English (but what do I know?) but get the U.S. completely wrong -- or do a good job on American English but go completely over the top on (or show very little understanding of) the UK conversion.

I am trying to wade my way through these and glean only the best from each, but as my knowledge of UK English stems largely from my keen appetite for 19th c. and earlier English novels, I am not terribly confident that I know how the 21st c. English reader will expect a computer data sheet to read.

An English friend brought me a pretty good dictionary (Chambers) of UK English, but Chambers seems to be more US English-friendly than I believe this company's English staff want me to be (e.g., the dictionary converts most words I think should end in "-ise" in UK English to "-ize" claiming that "-ise" is old fashioned. If that's actually true, that's fine -- but I rather suspect it is not true. My ten-volume Oxford is at the other end of the spectrum, but then again it's even older than I am, so that's hardly surprising.

So...can anyone recommend a book or a Web site that covers this subject with an equal amount of erudition regarding both versions of the language?

Thank you,
Claire