English (United States)

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tattila the Hun
Bloody Queen's English is the standard, boy! You best remember it!

Not that I care... But I quess there are differences. Like colour vs color, tomato vs... tomato.

While I've always appreciated Queens English, I'd still say that the softer accents prevalent in Manhattan are much more appealing than the harsher accents found in Flushing and Forest Hills.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by LordShiva
It sounds kinda like "Yiddish-vallat" though; they wouldn't like that.

My vallet is not particular Yiddish, but it vouldnt hurt it had a bissel more gelt, not that Im complaining. Nu?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by SpencerH
I wont rest until y'all is recognized by the standard spellchecker.

Y'all is one word I picked up in my 3 year sojourn in the Deep South, and Ive kept. There are too many occasions when its helpful to have a second person PLURAL, and I much prefer "y'all" to "youse" or "you guys".

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
My particular bugbear is when programmes give you two options - English (US) and English (International). Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Youd prefer that it was English(International) and English(UK) ? I mean the choice you quoted acknowledged that most "other country" English dialects are closer to British, and US standard is basically only used in US.

Now how about all the website where I have to pick a language, and they use flags as icons of choice, and I have to click on a Union Jack, despite the fact that the English web page is using USA standard English.

[lord of the mark]

"That it should be regarded as an anti-social act to examine and exhibit the constantly growing differences between English and American, as certain American pedants argue sharply---this doctrine is quite beyond my understanding. All it indicates, stripped of sophistry, is a somewhat childish effort to gain the approval of Englishmen---a belated efflorescence of the colonial spirit, often commingled with fashionable aspiration. The plain fact is that the English themselves are not deceived, nor do they grant the approval so ardently sought for. On the contrary, they are keenly aware of the differences between the two dialects, and often discuss them, as the following pages show. Perhaps one dialect, in the long run, will defeat and absorb the other; if the two nations continue to be partners in great adventures it may very well happen. But even in that case, something may be accomplished by examining the differences which exist today. In some ways, as in intonation, English usage is plainly better than American. In others, as in spelling, American usage is as plainly better than English. But in order to develop usages that the people of both nations will accept it is necessary to study the differences now visible. This study thus shows a certain utility. But its chief excuse is its human interest, for it prods deeply into national idiosyncrasies and ways of mind, and that sort of prodding is always entertaining"

H. L. Mencken, The American Language.

[SlowwHand]

LOTM, I figure that many posts in a row is a sign of 1 of 2 things.
Speed, or AADD.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
LOTM, I figure that many posts in a row is a sign of 1 of 2 things.
Speed, or AADD.

Thats correct doctor And dont forget, its not really a disorder, its a GIFT, or so they tell me.


Anyway, heres another quote.


“The new circumstances under which we are placed,call for new words, new phrases, and for the transfer of old words to new objects. An American dialect will therefore be formed.”

Thomas Jefferson.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I don't think that's true. What I've read suggests that 17th century English was closest to a modern Southern accent, actually.

Ah yes. By the Southern historian.

[Kuciwalker]

Which, as I recall, was your only counterargument. An ad hominem.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It's an ad hominem to point out that there may be potential bias in an argument?

[Kuciwalker]

It's an ad hominem to say "he's wrong because of potential bias".

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Which, as I recall, was your only counterargument. An ad hominem.

That was Tingkai. I pointed out that the Pitcairn islanders (who speak archaic English) don't appear to have a 'Southern accent'. Nor does the teaching method you mentioned have anything in particular to do with accents.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
It's an ad hominem to say "he's wrong because of potential bias".

I thought that the argument was he has potential bias, so we need to see something substantiating that particular argument without said bias (basically, a "we need more proof from a non-biased source" argument).

Or are you saying that you never partially dismiss an article because Daily Kos or Newsmax (on the other side) has advanced it as fact due to potential biases?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sandman
That was Tingkai. I pointed out that the Pitcairn islanders (who speak archaic English) don't appear to have a 'Southern accent'. Nor does the teaching method you mentioned have anything in particular to do with accents.

To be honest, I don't remember too much of the debate or the book, so it's a bit pointless for me to argue further.

[thesilentone]

Yeesh, semantics are boooring. After 300 years any distinct or isolated community is going to evolve it's own dialect/accent. Just look at australia/new zealand, I have no idea why they developed that accent so quickly, but it's there, we have to live with it

As said previously, I really don't care about the spelling differences, colour/color, I understand both just fine, I've even made the old mistake of spelling civilization rather than the proper english spelling of civilisation... You get the idea. My only beef was that if you're going to just give one option for english language, it's annoying for anyone not american to have to choose English (United States), maybe we need a more generic option?