<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3>In a message dated 11/06/03 18:10:17 GMT Daylight Time, jtdirl@hotmail.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
I had an interesting conversation today with a publisher and an academic on <BR>
the issue of capitalisation. They made the following observations:<BR>
<BR>
1. Capitalisation rules seem to differ between American English and British <BR>
English (or rather American English and all forms of english other than AE). <BR>
Whereas the former seems nowadays to be following a 'minimal use of caps' <BR>
policy, non-AE english uses caps far more often.<BR>
<BR>
2. This issue has caused considerable problems with American students who <BR>
come to Europe for summer courses. Europeans see the non-use of caps as <BR>
'semi-literate' and regularly dock students marks for it. Americans see non <BR>
AE use of caps as 'ludicrous' and over the top. (I know from personal <BR>
experience that the few caps english of AE users has caused bitter anger in <BR>
my university, where lecturers 'hit the roof' at AE users' insistence of <BR>
lower-casing names of organisations, electoral processes, governmental <BR>
offices, etc.)<BR>
<BR>
3. Within many academic areas, a major battle has been waged on this issue. <BR>
To the resentment of non-AE users, AE capitalisation rules increasingly tend <BR>
to be followed. The reason is purely economic. Publishers see the US as <BR>
their biggest market, and so publish books in AE or in non-AE but following <BR>
some of the characteristics of AE in areas like capitalisation. (This has <BR>
infuriated many non AE-using authors. Last week, one British English author <BR>
threatened to sue her publisher for 'rewriting' her textbook in AE when it <BR>
was aimed at a UK market. She accused them of 'dumbing down english to suit <BR>
Americans'. Some authors, according to the publisher I was talking to, have <BR>
insisted in their contracts that their books /not/ be rewritten in AE, even <BR>
when an edition is launched in the US. (American authors may well equally <BR>
have insisted that their books not be turned into non-AE. As the publisher I <BR>
was speaking to is British she has no knowledge of such contracts if they <BR>
exist in the US).<BR>
<BR>
If this is the case (and both the publisher and academic said so, while both <BR>
expressing their dislike of AE capitalisation trends and what the latter <BR>
called the 'wholescale manging of non-AE to suit publishers' profits by <BR>
trampling over the language use of everyone who isn't American') that does <BR>
explain the rows over capitalisation on wiki, and how it is AE users like <BR>
Ec, Mav and Zoe who are so 'anti' capitalisation while it is users of other <BR>
forms of english other than AE (Tannin, myself, etc) who want it. For if <BR>
Mav, Ec etc were taught one set of rules on capitalisation usage, we were <BR>
taught a different one and are infuriated by what, going by what we were <BR>
taught, seems to be wiki's insistence on wrong use of capitals and non-use <BR>
of capitals where they should be used.<BR>
<BR>
In the circumstances, we should apply to the same policy as we apply in <BR>
general to American english versus British english, ie, respect difference <BR>
and allow users to set the policy in an individual article, based on /their/ <BR>
usage of capitals in /their/ version of english. As most of the capitals <BR>
issue involves AE users changing capitalisation applied by non AE users like <BR>
Tannin in articles the non AE users have written (like on birds), it <BR>
suggests that that process should stop and the rules on capitalisation <BR>
should be amended accordingly. The issue is already causing enough rows <BR>
outside wiki, with the increasing application of AE rules by publishing <BR>
houses and style books causing major anger (the publisher said one author <BR>
called it 'American linguistic imperialism', with AE rules being applied <BR>
even though they conflict with all the grammar books used outside the US.) <BR>
The best solution is not to enforce AE capitalisation rules but simply to <BR>
recognise that different english users worldwide use different rules on this <BR>
issue and to leave it to users, depending on their linguistic culture, to <BR>
decide on capitalisation just as they decide on spelling in American <BR>
English, British English or the various subsets of the latter (Hiberno <BR>
English, Australian English, etc.)<BR>
<BR>
JT<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
Interesting; although I'd spotted some odd ( to a non-American) "missed" capitals, in articles, it never occurred to me that there was a genuine cultural difference. <BR>
<BR>
It also explains why from the Europe/Oz viewpoint this debate looked a bit like US v the rest, although I must admit that paranoia might also have been a factor. <BR>
<BR>
I think JT's email helps to explain how this controversy has arisen , and why it has been so difficult to resolve.<BR>
<BR>
Jim<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>