Page 1 of 2
1
2
LastLast
  1. #1

    Is british spelling superior over american spelling?

    O or ou? Which is better?

  2. #2
    There's no plausible reason for one to be "better" than the other. The only way spelling or language can be "bad" is if it inadequately conveys information. American and British spelling idiosyncrasies are basically irrelevant on that front.

  3. #3
    British spelling requires more letters, which wastes more time and takes more effort. Ergo, USA all the way.

  4. #4
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Neither? They are both just different.
    MMO-Champ the place where calling out trolls get you into more trouble than trolling.

  5. #5
    When considering spelling in a language called English, I'll probably ask the English for advice first.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Narwhalosh Whalescream View Post
    O or ou? Which is better?
    Neither, since words are not always spelled how they sound, spelling is nothing but memory.

  7. #7
    Neither is better.

    As a side note, for some reason I always use "grey" rather than "gray". I don't know why but I always have.

  8. #8
    Please wait Temp name's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Under construction
    Posts
    14,631
    I primarily use the British spelling, but there are some Americanized words that slip in sometimes.

    That said, neither are inherently better, they're just different ways of achieving the same thing, and neither are really a true representation of how words are pronounced.

  9. #9
    Immortal TEHPALLYTANK's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Texas(I wish it were CO)
    Posts
    7,512
    Whichever uses fewer letters. I stick to American English when writing for the sake of better flow, but I don't mind British English for words that have the same number of letters (e.g., paralyzed/paralysed, criticize/criticise).
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigbamboozal View Post
    Intelligence is like four wheel drive, it's not going to make you unstoppable, it just sort of tends to get you stuck in more remote places.
    Quote Originally Posted by MerinPally View Post
    If you want to be disgusted, next time you kiss someone remember you've got your mouth on the end of a tube which has shit at the other end, held back by a couple of valves.

  10. #10
    I wasnt sure the English were still primarily speaking English anymore. Last time I was in London it was hard to find restaurants with primarily English menu's.

  11. #11
    I mean, they both kind of suck in that they aren't faithful representations of phonemes and use a lot of digraphs. See the vowel sounds represented by "ough."

    As long as the information is conveyed in a clear and understandable manner, does it really matter though? I usually stick to American spelling, but I do sometimes interchange -ize and -ise. Gray/grey is another one that I interchange frequently. I'll even spell theater/theatre differently depending on which mood I'm in, but center is never centre, and color is never colour for me.

  12. #12
    hmf...if I recall, the Brits changed things up because the colonies were using "their" language.

  13. #13
    Pretty close to hitting the bottom of the barrel with this one.
    Probably running on a Pentium 4

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    hmf...if I recall, the Brits changed things up because the colonies were using "their" language.
    It was Webster who culled the "u"s from words and changed the "s"s to "z"s IIRC.

  15. #15
    I was taught the British spelling back in school, but considering the North American spelling resembles Spanish, my mother tongue, more, I think I should swap.

  16. #16
    They are both fairly subpar written languages. Regarding your specific example, the U is superfluous.

    The English language has other issues, such as the letters C, Q, W, and X having no reason to exist.
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeth Hawkins View Post
    They are both fairly subpar written languages. Regarding your specific example, the U is superfluous.

    The English language has other issues, such as the letters C, Q, W, and X having no reason to exist.
    Without W well.. these w words would be a problem. C Q X I can get X often becomes a Z but we already have a Z... some words require C like Chai, the problem is C often ends wounding like a K.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeth Hawkins View Post
    They are both fairly subpar written languages. Regarding your specific example, the U is superfluous.

    The English language has other issues, such as the letters C, Q, W, and X having no reason to exist.
    W exists perfectly fine, and maps to a phoneme that isn't represented otherwise quite well. I get that Q and X don't represent any special phoneme on their own, but at least C is part of the ch digraph.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Without W well.. these w words would be a problem. C Q X I can get X often becomes a Z but we already have a Z... some words require C like Chai, the problem is C often ends wounding like a K.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cinnamilk View Post
    W exists perfectly fine, and maps to a phoneme that isn't represented otherwise quite well. I get that Q and X don't represent any special phoneme on their own, but at least C is part of the ch digraph.
    Fair points, I need to elaborate my statement.
    The letter W could sufficiently be replaced by the letter U in some words, and outright removed in others.
    CH (and other instances of two letters creating an independent sound) would be better replaced with a single new letter.

    These ideas are built off a grander musing I have had regarding individual letters not needing multiple sounds associated with them. The variances and exceptions to rules in the English language serve to make it more difficult to learn. Our alphabet would mightily grow in size to accommodate these and other changes. A major overhaul of the language would cause countless issues for quite a while, so I am neither expecting nor advocating any real change in the foreseeable future. Words turn very alien when I get through with them.

    "Water" would be "Uater" for example.
    The ER combination is also a tad unnecessary, as the letter R makes that sound on its own.
    "Water" would then be "Uatr", pronunciation intact.
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
    PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD

  20. #20
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeth Hawkins View Post
    Fair points, I need to elaborate my statement.
    The letter W could sufficiently be replaced by the letter U in some words, and outright removed in others.
    CH (and other instances of two letters creating an independent sound) would be better replaced with a single new letter.

    These ideas are built off a grander musing I have had regarding individual letters not needing multiple sounds associated with them. The variances and exceptions to rules in the English language serve to make it more difficult to learn. Our alphabet would mightily grow in size to accommodate these and other changes. A major overhaul of the language would cause countless issues for quite a while, so I am neither expecting nor advocating any real change in the foreseeable future. Words turn very alien when I get through with them.

    "Water" would be "Uater" for example.
    The ER combination is also a tad unnecessary, as the letter R makes that sound on its own.
    "Water" would then be "Uatr", pronunciation intact.
    English is hard to learn because its a bastardized Germanic language with a crap ton of loan words......

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •