Sorry, trolls are fun, and I'm bored....
On Sep 23, 2005, at 1:56 AM, Jack & Naree wrote:
If you search for "American-English" on
google, you'll find a long
very long list) of the differences.
Oh, hm, and what "language" did you search google in, prithetell? You
know, they have different languages and all.
Colour/Color is but a superficial one, but it is
fundamental word and article entry.
Oh yes! Let(')s get into wars over this one!
The issue is that to choose one spelling over the
other goes against
principle that both spellings are equally valid; or that each spelling
regarded as the correct one (and the other as a foreign one) by
people, in each case.
And this is why you are horribly, horridly, wrong. Your brain lacks
(apparently) the simple understanding that *both* are the only right
spelling, and thus, only both are proper, which is why there is no
There are other issues with other words, phrases or
e.g.: if I want to search for "tap", do I redirected to "faucet"?
"do I redirected" is a new one on me ("do I get directed", maybe?)....
but yes, there are variants in english. Travel much?
If you use the word "faucet" in the British
Isles, few people will
you mean - even in context (they might think it's a technical term for
of a tap).
So, uneducated people mean we must have a wikipedia for every grotto?
In such a case, it's a foreign word to millions of
speakers (though not necessarily all), and unintelligible - it has to
I come from Arizona. We have a plant there. It's called a Saguaro
(Pronounced sa-wah-ro). Yes, unusual terms will always have to be
translated for people outside of their realm, be it a faucet, plant, or
wind (such as Mariah).
To illustrate how the English I speak (in England)
Which bears little semblance to the original language...
is a different language
to American-English, I was in Bangkok a couple of years ago, and in an
internet cafe - a man turned to me and said:
"What's up?" I said, "Nothing? Why?", he looked at me, baffled; I
back at him, baffled - we were using the same words, but speaking
languages; neither of us knew what we meant and why.
Welcome to language.
Maybe a young man might ask you "what's going down", and you might be
illiterate, He might ask you "where be the shizznat?" and you might be
You would *still* be the one illiterate in modern english, not he. You
have not kept up on your studies, if you cannot translate the above.
It became apparent that we were from different
countries, and some
explaining was required - we had to learn each other's language. We
speaking the same language.
You refuse to learn how language changes without prompting, he adopts
and learns. Simple enough.
Americans might want to call their language
"English", but the term is
inappropriate, because it already exists for a language that is
autochthonous to England, whence the name comes.
When the englanders and amis can speak english, the world will be much
Tat's that you say? The do?
Uh, wi didyn't yu say sew?
People in england, just like people all over the world, have made
english fit their tongues, their lands, their locale.
Another term has to be
created for this offshoot of English,
Which, the brit version? Scots? Brooklyn? (etc. etc.)
and the term "American English" is
used in the OED. So it's reasonable to say that Americans don't speak
"English", they speak "American-English",
And UK folk don't speak english, so much as they speak a mess of
socially derived variants of the language. Like amis do.
which is written often using words
that look identical or similar, but that does not mean that the
Make a wikipedia where every sub-language can define every
colloquialism, regional difference, subculture change?
Having words which look the same does not mean they
are the same.
The word "color" is spelt
Wow, this is funny. No irony meter here, though... :-)
the same in a number of languages:
American-English, Spanish, Asturianu, Catalan... but not in
If it's good enough for Google and Gmail to have American-English and
Commonwealth Englishes (which should probably be unified as
You've been fighting for dominance over 800 years. Get over it, you
lost. The "English" can't even figure out what england is, and the
language fragments away, just as the lost empire does. (Note to amis:
this is your fate, too).
But let(')s worry about a U in color/colo(u)r.
then it should be good enough for Wikipedia.
No offence to all of you who are not native speakers, but this debate
better had between native speakers - as it would be for any language.
LOL. Outside speakers are less biased. Couldn't have that, could we?
I propose the fairest and most pragmatic solution is
that the English
Wikipedia be duplicated into two and that these two are renamed:
I propose you fork off. The code is there. Go for it.
This is in keeping with Wikipedia's own policy
statement on English;
also seems fair considering the existence of things like:
Norwegian (Bokmal) & Norwegian (Nynorsk); Dutch, Limburgish and
Simple English; Galician and Portuguese; and frankly some Slavic
I think those are insane too, and many fed by racial hatred.
I wish they (the racists) would fork off as well.