# British English and American English



## Cache

Hi!

Relax, I wont ask which one is better 

Two weeks ago, a friend told me American English would spread over the world and British English would disappear little by little, because of USA power and influence in all the world.

Since he told me that, I have been wondering if that could be true....
Also, it may worry me because I am studying British English XD

So, What do you think?

Regards!

PS:Correct my english


----------



## übermönch

AE may very well spread though the world, but certainly not through England! It's there, it has allways been there and it'll be sound as a pound!


----------



## boardslide315

There's really no need to worry even if it is the case, they really aren't very different. I've read books by British writers and couldn't tell a difference, just a few spelling changes here and there. Most of the spelling differences can be learned in an hour or two, and are widely understood by speakers of both forms.


----------



## tonyray

I concur with Ubermonch, it'll be "sound as a pound." That's a good one!  Relax, if you're studying BE or AE, it doesn't matter. Whichever you choose is valid and understood in New York, London, Sydney or wherever you may be in the English-speaking world. Honestly, whenever I read a book, I can't tell whether it was published in the US or the UK. And I don't think that one version of the English language will necessarily drown out and nullify another version. No one is going to change how they speak, what particular words or expressions they use and the like.  It's like with Spanish, if you speak Spanish, you speak Spanish. 

That's my take.


----------



## kaleidoscope

"Sound as a pound"... nice BE expression. 

Cache, I wouldn't worry if I were you, because:

British English is the preferred form of English (in education, etc) in nearly all of Europe (i.e. hundreds of millions of people).

British English is also spoken as a second language by hundreds of millions more in India (huge economy) and other places.

In nearly every country where English is spoken as a first language (UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, etc, etc) it's usually more BE than AE.

Yo he aprendido el español de España (o sea, la variante que sólo hablan menos del 11% de los hispanohablantes del mundo) y no me preocupo de que dentro de unos años ya no me vaya a servir, porque a fin de cuentas el español es el español y estoy seguro de que vas a poder entender lo que estoy escribiendo ahora aunque no seas de España (y aunque mi español no sea muy bueno ), y bueno, lo mismo pasa con el inglés... o sea que realmente no hay mucha diferencia entre el inglés británico y el americano, y nos podemos entender perfectamente.

So, I really wouldn't worry about what you're friend said. Whether you are learning British or American English, I think the most important thing is to *do it well* (and I can already see that that's what you're doing ).

Good luck.


----------



## JamesM

I can't imagine British English ever disappearing as long there is an England. 

I know that things have shifted as far as the acceptability of American English, compared to thirty years ago. I couldn't get a position as a Conversational English aide in France because I was from the U.S. and had "the wrong accent" and spoke "the wrong English."  I imagine British English is still the preferred flavor of English for French students, and why not? England is their neighbor. 

Many Asian students seem to be learning American English these days. I think that's primarily influenced by the amount of business being done around the Pacific Rim. 

Nevertheless, I don't think you can go wrong learning British English. The accent has a certain cachet in the U.S. still to this day, and the grammar is very similar. If anything, you will probably be learning a more formal style of written English than if you learned American English. It is always easier to become more informal than it is to become more formal, in my opinion, so this could be to your advantage.

You might have some occasional confusion over spelling differences or the use of certain words when dealing with people or businesses in the U.S., but they are minor. 

If I were you, I would not be worried in the least about learning British English.


----------



## boardslide315

kaleidoscope said:


> British English is also spoken as a second language by hundreds of millions more in India (huge economy) and other places.



Since the largest distinction between the two is the accent, I am going to have to disagree with this. Although historically Indian people learned BE, modern times have noted a trend towards AE, especially with the rise of outsourcing in the United States. Indian people are trained to sound like Americans because that is where their jobs come from. 

Feel free to argue...if I think I might be right about something I tend to express it just in case


----------



## ElaineG

Actually, what is spoken in India is Indian English, which while more similar to BE than to AE, is more distinct than anything else: accent, vocabulary, grammar, etc.

If you care, you might find this interesting: http://www.vsubhash.com/desienglish.asp

or this: http://www.languageinindia.com/junjul2002/baldridgeindianenglish.html


----------



## kaleidoscope

boardslide315 said:


> Since the largest distinction between the two is the accent, I am going to have to disagree with this. Although historically Indian people learned BE, modern times have noted a trend towards AE, especially with the rise of outsourcing in the United States. Indian people are trained to sound like Americans because that is where their jobs come from.
> 
> Feel free to argue...if I think I might be right about something I tend to express it just in case


I definitely disagree. 
A huge amount of British companies' call centres are based in India and whenever I've spoken to an Indian customer service person (usually after phoning my bank and expecting to speak to someone in this country  ) their English always seems like an old-fashioned variety of BE to me.
I participate in a couple of IT-related forums online and all the young Indian guys there definitely speak (or at least write) with more of a BE influence... for example, they use "mate", "sorted", "no worries" and other colloquial British expressions.
Also, I sometimes see Indian films on late-night TV here, and when the dialogue switches to English (which is usually quite often) their English is without doubt more British than American.
Well, that's just my experience anyway...


----------



## ps139

Any non-native speaker of English I've ever met who is not from the western hemisphere has learned British English. When you watch the BBC in Europe, it is British English. Since most people in the world do not live in the western hemisphere, I think British English has dominance.


----------



## Victoria32

Cache said:


> Hi!
> 
> Relax, I wont ask which one is better
> 
> Two weeks ago, a friend told me American English would spread over the world and British English would disappear little by little, because of USA power and influence in all the world.
> 
> Since he told me that, I have been wondering if that could be true....
> Also, it may worry me because I am studying British English XD
> 
> So, What do you think?
> 
> Regards!
> 
> PS:Correct my english


My first thought was: "not while I have breath in my body!" 
But seriously, you have no need to worry... AE is not that wide-spread, and there are many more varieties of English than just AE/BE... Australian, New Zealand, Indian etc.


----------



## boardslide315

kaleidoscope said:


> I definitely disagree.
> A huge amount of British companies' call centres are based in India and whenever I've spoken to an Indian customer service person (usually after phoning my bank and expecting to speak to someone in this country  ) their English always seems like an old-fashioned variety of BE to me.
> I participate in a couple of IT-related forums online and all the young Indian guys there definitely speak (or at least write) with more of a BE influence... for example, they use "mate", "sorted", "no worries" and other colloquial British expressions.\


Interesting. I guess the training in AE is only for those who are working for US based companies, hence they are the only ones I've ever had experience with.


----------



## jess oh seven

oooh another way to make the US think they are superior to every other country in the world! ha! no.


----------



## aqueoushumour

American english is british english with a few (minor) differences! Very little vocabulary differs. Different regions within a country often have different accents and vocabulary and these regionalities continue to persist. AE is an extended example of this and so there is no reason why one particular form should dominate another to the extent that one disappears.


----------



## cuchuflete

Hundreds, maybe thousands, of threads in the English Only forum show that there are two broad categories of English, and many others, equally valid but with lesser reach, and that these forms have cross-fertilized for centuries.  The sharing and mutual influence continue today.  

The differences in grammar are minimal.  The differences in spelling are minimal.  The differences in colloquial usage are
moderate, but do not impede mutual comprehension.  The variety of accents is vast, but that is of no immediate importance to a language learner who works at one of the 'standard' forms.   

I like the way aquesoushumour has stated it:

"American english is british english with a few (minor) differences!"

Vitreoushumor has the obverse view:

"British English is American English with a few (minor) differences!"


----------



## zerduja

besides india,other hybrid forms of english are being created, even in America .  a blending of spanish and english called "spanglish"


----------



## emma42

I agree with Cuchuflete, particularly the reminder about "cross-fertilization", which, I think, is especially apparent from AE to BE.  In my experience, over the last 20 years, there has been a huge amount of borrowing from AE by BE in terms of vocabulary and even intonation.  This is not just confined to "yoof culture [youth culture]" and "gangsta [gangster] culture" as in:

*Yo!* [Hey]
*Yo, you mutha!* [Hey + insult]
*Sounds* [popular music]
*Look at the hand [cos the face don't wanna know]* [Talk to my hand because I do not want to listen to you],

but is also found in pronunciations of words such as controversy, traditionally pronounced con*tro*versy in BE, but increasingly pronounced the AE way now in Britain (*con*troversy).

I have also recently heard the word vocabulary pronounced voca_*bu*_lary in AE, but I tend to think this was peculiar to the individual saying it.
So it is important to remember this continuous cross-fertilization.


----------



## DCPaco

kaleidoscope said:


> "Sound as a pound"... nice BE expression.
> 
> Cache, I wouldn't worry if I were you, because:
> 
> British English is the preferred form of English (in education, etc) in nearly all of Europe (i.e. hundreds of millions of people).
> 
> British English is also spoken as a second language by hundreds of millions more in India (huge economy) and other places.
> 
> In nearly every country where English is spoken as a first language (UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, etc, etc) it's usually more BE than AE.
> 
> Yo he aprendido el español de España (o sea, la variante que sólo hablan menos del 11% de los hispanohablantes del mundo) y no me preocupo de que dentro de unos años ya no me vaya a servir, porque a fin de cuentas el español es el español y estoy seguro de que vas a poder entender lo que estoy escribiendo ahora aunque no seas de España (y aunque mi español no sea muy bueno ), y bueno, lo mismo pasa con el inglés... o *sea que realmente no hay mucha diferencia entre el inglés británico y el americano, y nos podemos entender perfectamente. (I totally agree and don't get me wrong, I too have enjoyed many things British:  New Order!  Also, I love writing spilt instead of spilled.)*
> 
> So, I really wouldn't worry about what you're friend said. Whether you are learning British or American English, I think the most important thing is to *do it well* (and I can already see that that's what you're doing ).
> 
> Good luck.


 
I agree as far as the BE being spoken and written in more countries than AE.  The Canadians sound like Americans, but write like the British.  

As for the comment on Spanish, there is far less difference between the Spanish of educated people of Spain and the Educated people of Latin America (or Hispanic America) than that in BE and AE.  If you are speaking of regional issues, even within a country, you have dialects.  You have to remember that New Spain had very strong ties to Spain and its viceroyalty made certain that the language remained pure (similar to what the French do).  After the viceroyal period, the Royal Academy of Spain remained as the source for lexical issues (even if there are now Academies in many if not all of the Latin American countries, they are all affiliated with the Royal Academy of Spain).  We don't use vosotros (but we understand it and those of us who are educated, can conjugate it and use it with ease)--that's it.  (Read a novel written by an educated Mexican [that isn't featuring "local color"] and read one written by a Spaniard and you will find very little difference--if any.)  As for speech patterns, well, even in Spain they vary...some Spaniards from the south sound to me like Salvadoreans (like the band Estopa)--which is not what I typically expect when I hear a Spaniard.  

I make this statement because there seems to be a horrible imperialism in the United States that favors Iberian Spanish over the American sort and interviewers that aren't as well aware of the minute differences that exist between the two, use this as an excuse to discredit equally able Latin Americans (it's similar to the imperialism found on the U.S. east coast that even in an American English class refuses to write in anything but "the Queen's English").  I didn't mean to get on my soap box...but oh well.


----------



## DCPaco

Question:  Do Brits say "computer" or something like the French and Spanish:  ordenateur? ordenador?


----------



## panjandrum

übermönch said:


> AE may very well spread though the world, but certainly not through England! [...]





JamesM said:


> I can't imagine British English ever disappearing as long there is an England. [...]


A gentle comment - don't confuse BE with EE.
In other words, although there are more English in the British Isles than there are others, the English are very much in the minority of BE-speakers world-wide.


boardslide315 said:


> Since the largest distinction between the two is the accent, [...]


I'm not at all sure about that. There is at least as much variety in accent within the British Isles as there is between here and the US. Take a quick search through the English Only forum for AE and BE to get a flavour of the kind of differences. Many are well recognised, many are very subtle and the potential causes of misunderstanding. For example, what does "You did quite well" mean? (See quite: BE/AE  - please don't comment here.)



DCPaco said:


> Question: Do Brits say "computer" or something like the French and Spanish: ordenateur? ordenador?


The differences aren't that great  
When we invented the computer, that's what we called it.


----------



## Etcetera

"Sound as a pound" - what a nice expression, indeed.  I'll remember it!
I don't think there's any reasons to worry about British English. Yes, American English is very widespread these days, but here in Russia, for example, it's British English which students are taught at universities and in most language schools. Of course, no one is forcing them to accept only one variety of English - several my friends at the University prefer to speak with American pronunciation, use American spelling, etc. But most students choose to learn British English. 
At the school I'm working currently we use a lot of textbooks written in American English, but most teachers speak to their students with British pronunciation.


----------



## Cache

kaleidoscope said:


> "Sound as a pound"... nice BE expression.
> 
> Cache, I wouldn't worry if I were you, because:
> 
> British English is the preferred form of English (in education, etc) in nearly all of Europe (i.e. hundreds of millions of people).
> 
> British English is also spoken as a second language by hundreds of millions more in India (huge economy) and other places.
> 
> In nearly every country where English is spoken as a first language (UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, etc, etc) it's usually more BE than AE.
> 
> Yo he aprendido el español de España (o sea, la variante que sólo hablan menos del 11% de los hispanohablantes del mundo) y no me preocupo de que dentro de unos años ya no me vaya a servir, porque a fin de cuentas el español es el español *y estoy seguro de que vas a poder entender lo que estoy escribiendo ahora aunque no seas de España (y aunque mi español no sea muy bueno )*, y bueno, lo mismo pasa con el inglés... o sea que realmente no hay mucha diferencia entre el inglés británico y el americano, y nos podemos entender perfectamente.
> 
> So, I really wouldn't worry about what you're friend said. Whether you are learning British or American English, I think the most important thing is to *do it well* (and I can already see that that's what you're doing ).
> 
> Good luck.




Your english is very good man! Congratulations! I can understand it perfectly.

Thank you for saying my english is good . I do my best but my problem is the pronunciation(if anyone can help me, please send me a PM)

Thank you all and please correct my english


----------



## zerduja

in my opinion, anyone who understands "queen s english" would be understood in any english speaking country


----------



## Victoria32

DCPaco said:


> Question:  Do Brits say "computer" or something like the French and Spanish:  ordenateur? ordenador?


Definitely computer...

(I nearly said "deffo" - BE idiom, then I remembered where I am...


----------



## PedroAznar

American English taking over the world? English is itself one language with minor variants. It isn't two seperate ones, thus how something can take over itself?


----------



## mplsray

PedroAznar said:


> American English taking over the world? English is itself one language with minor variants. It isn't two seperate ones, thus how something can take over itself?


 
One dialect can replace another, however, and Standard American English and Standard British English are dialects. Smaller regional dialects have died out, so in principle, it is possible for a standard dialect to die out. At the moment, however, it appears that just the opposite is happening, that more standard dialects are being created. See page 111 of _The Cambridge Encyclopedia of The English Language_ by David Crystal.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

I think that the ultimate match between AE and BE will be fought from the point of view of the mean used to spread these two main kinds of English.
In Europe, people can learn BE in schools, colleges, whereas AE is learnt from the TV, from the movies, from internet, from most of the PC softwares and in many other ways which are directly accessible for everybody and often free.
Bearing all that in mind, it's easy to foresee which, between AE and BE, is going to be the winner..


----------



## invictaspirit

I taught English at a private high school in Madrid between 1999 and 2003.  A lot of parents got private tuition for their kids.  BE natives could charge around 25% more in fees than AE native speakers.  Some parents sought out specifically AE tutors because their kids were going to study in the US.  But a large majority thought that BE simply _was_ English and that AE was a colonial variant of it. 

(I don't hold this opinion, by the way!  Just reporting what rich Spaniards tended to think up to 2003.)


----------



## Balthazar

When I taught with chilean teacher who had taught British accent... but I like speaking american `cause I watch and listen to american accent all day.

Although the BE is easier to learn...


----------



## Nasdiego

Hi,
Well, there isn't a huge difference between BE and AE. They both are pretty similar, and you cannot discern the difference whenever you read abook. You cannot know if the book is published by an British or American English. Also, you will be more formal than the American English, and your witing will be stronget than if you learn the American English. Also, they will be British English as long as if there an England.


----------



## invictaspirit

Folks, I would guard you against believing that BrE is 'more formal' than AmE. This has been said a couple of times on the thread. In my opinion, it is not.

If you take the way the Queen speaks, as an example, and compare her to George Bush, then yes, BrE is more formal. But very few Brits speak like the Queen. Tony Blair, for example, speaks in a very informal way for a Prime Minister.  Then other famous Brits you might know, such as football players, actors, rock musicians etc etc speak very informally indeed.

If you are talking about how the regular people in the street of both countries speak, or even business people, you are going to find a great deal of *in*formal speech and writing. And if one variant is the more informal, I would suggest it was BrE. The British use *vast* amounts of slang in all but the most polite/formal situations...including in business, politics and so on. In my experience, it is Americans who are the (slightly) more correct and formal speakers and writers.

Media is also an area where BrE is the more informal.  Brits find American broadcasting guidelines about swearing, blaspheming, accents etc etc on TV extremely prudish and fussy.  You are far more likely to hear the F-word and other profanities on British television than American, for example. In the UK is it rarely beeped out. It's the same in major newspapers.

The properness and formality of the Brits is a myth.  I genuinely believe Americans are more so in most situations.


----------



## DCPaco

invictaspirit said:


> I taught English at a private high school in Madrid between 1999 and 2003. A lot of parents got private tuition for their kids. BE natives could charge around 25% more in fees than AE native speakers. Some parents sought out specifically AE tutors because their kids were going to study in the US. But a large majority thought that BE simply _was_ English and that AE was a colonial variant of it.
> 
> (I don't hold this opinion, by the way! Just reporting what rich Spaniards tended to think up to 2003.)


 
This is similar to how on the East Coast of the U.S. people who seek Spanish instructors, seek those who speak Spanish with an Iberian accent because that _is _Spanish--to them at least; I believe this to be either "imperialism" or quite a heavy does of Europhilia.  (I've been guilty of the latter prefering the music of England over American, among other things.)


----------



## Sallyb36

DCPaco said:


> This is similar to how on the East Coast of the U.S. people who seek Spanish instructors, seek those who speak Spanish with an Iberian accent because that _is _Spanish--to them at least; I believe this to be either "imperialism" or quite a heavy does of Europhilia.  (I've been guilty of the latter *prefering the music of England over American*, among other things.)


that's not Europhilia, that's just plain good taste!!


----------



## DCPaco

Sallyb36 said:


> that's not Europhilia, that's just plain good taste!!


 
Agreed


----------



## cuchuflete

DCPaco said:


> This is similar to how on the East Coast of the U.S. people who seek Spanish instructors, seek those who speak Spanish with an Iberian accent because that _is _Spanish--to them at least;



I'd call that statement myth-mongering!   Most high-school and college/university texts in use today emphasize American Spanish usage, and most school faculty have been trained to
speak with Spanish American pronunciation.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

cuchuflete said:


> I'd call that statement myth-mongering!   Most high-school and college/university texts in use today emphasize American Spanish usage, and most school faculty have been trained to
> speak with Spanish American pronunciation.




What do you mean with Spanish *American* pronunciation? Spanish spoken in Mexico and South America? as far as I know, Mexico and every Middle or South American country has its own way to pronounce Spanish:for example in Argentina they speak a very typical Spanish, if compared with the Iberian  Spanish.
I'm quite sure that the Spanish version taught in Italian and European universities is the Iberian Spanish or what professors call _standard_ Spanish.


----------



## kaleidoscope

Paulfromitaly said:


> I'm quite sure that the Spanish version taught in Italian and European universities is the Iberian Spanish or what professors call _standard_ Spanish.


Although on at least a couple of European radio stations that broadcast some content in Spanish (Radio Prague and... I can't remember the other one I've listened to), the non-native presenters use Standard Mexican Spanish rather than the Iberian variety. I guess because they broadcast in Latin America too, and in a global Spanish-speaking context, Standard Mexican Spanish is the most likely candidate for the genuine standard.
Possibly a topic for another thread, though....


----------



## Dr. Quizá

I was taught only BE, yet I find AE to be more "foreigner friendly" so it spreads more easily by itself. It seems to me English phonetics have more nuances and subtleties so it's harder to understand for untrained ears. I guess the massive immigration from all countries to the US made AE's phonetics to loss peculiarities of the sound of Britain and acquire more "standard", international sounds.


----------



## Etcetera

Sallyb36 said:


> that's not Europhilia, that's just plain good taste!!


I wholeheartedly agree.

It seems to me that for a native of Russian learning American pronunciation is a bit easier, because the Americans don't omit [r] when the British do.


----------



## Hockey13

Sallyb36 said:


> that's not Europhilia, that's just plain good taste!!


 
Judging by the music you Brits must receive from us, I can't blame you, but try not to knock our entire music scene based on the pop. You did produce the Spice Girls, after all.


----------



## emma42

Sorry, nasdiego, I disagree.  I find it very easy to distinguish between written AE and written BE.  Perhaps English is not your first language?


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Well, Emma, can you give us a few examples of how you do it to make it clear for everybody?


----------



## Etcetera

Hockey13 said:


> Judging by the music you Brits must receive from us, I can't blame you, but try not to knock our entire music scene based on the pop. You did produce the Spice Girls, after all.


What's wrong with the Spice Girls? I used to be a fan of them, and I still love their songs. They had something about them.

The differences between written BrE and written AmE are in most cases obvious. Take, for example, favour/favor, saviour/savior, and so on. 
Then, there are differences in grammar. As far as I know, the Americans often prefer to use Past Simple where the British use Present Perfect. For example:
- I have just bought a ticket. (BrE)
- I just bought a ticket. (AmE)


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Oh!! I didn`t quite mean that!! I was thinking of the actual vocabulary and grammar, not spelling.


----------



## invictaspirit

There are lots of prepositional differences:

*at* the weekend (BE)
*on* the weekend (AE)

Cromwell Road is named *after* the Lord Protector of the brief English republic (BE)
Cromwell Road is named *for* the Lord Protector of the brief English republic (AE)

You can reach him *on* 314-5662 (BE)
You can reach him *at* 314-5662 (AE)

There are many others like this.


----------



## Etcetera

My favourite example:
*at* school (BrE)
*in* school (AmE)

As for the differences in vocabulary, well, there's plenty of them! 
- flat (BrE)
- apartments (AmE)

- autumn (BrE)
- fall (AmE)

- holiday (BrE)
- vacation (AmE)

Shall we continue?


----------



## invictaspirit

As for vocabulary...there are thought to be over a thousand words in common usage in each variant that are different and several thousand less common ones.

There are certain topics where nearly everything is different...usually concepts that were invented and developed separately in each language area.

In my experience, the topic that produces the most difference is anything to do with cars, roads and traffic.

BE/AE:

bonnet/hood
boot/trunk
gear lever/gear shift
indicators/blinkers
bumper/fender
traffic light/stop light
motorway/expressway
dual-carriageway/divided highway
urban clearway/no stopping
(central) reservation/median
crash-barrier/median
ringroad or 'orbital'/beltway
give way sign/yield sign
roundabout/rotary
interchange or junction/exit
petrol/gas
pavement/sidewalk
pedestrian crossing or zebra crossing/crosswalk
windscreen/windshield
beep or hoot/honk
tyres/tires


----------



## Setwale_Charm

the eternal:
petrol (Br E)
gas (AmE)

motorway (BrE)
highway (AmE)

Sweets(BrE)
candies (AmE)

taxi (BrE)
cab (AmE)

pavement (BrE)
sidewalk (AmE)

crisps (BrE)
chips (AmE)

Chips(BrE)
French fries (AmE)

Ok, can somebody think of any differences in grammar or style?


----------



## Etcetera

Setwale_Charm said:


> Ok, can somebody think of any differences in grammar or style?


I've mentioned one:


Etcetera said:


> As far as I know, the Americans often prefer to use Past Simple where the British use Present Perfect. For example:
> - I have just bought a ticket. (BrE)
> - I just bought a ticket. (AmE)


----------



## MarcB

*Here are some comments on previous posts*
*at* school (BrE)
*in* school (AmE) depending on the context AE  uses both
BE/AE:
traffic light/stop light AE  uses both
bumper/fender bumper is also AE, fender= BE mudguard
beep or hoot/honk   AE beep or honk
taxi (BrE)
cab (AmE) AE both
 
I have just bought a ticket. (BrE)
I just bought a ticket. (AmE)  AE both are used it is a matter of personal style.
autumn (BrE)
fall (AmE)  AE both are used
motorway/expressway
dual-carriageway/divided highway   divided highway maybe regional but I have never heard it.  Freeway,highway,parkway,turnpike, toll road depends on region. Some places use more than one and it may depend on if there is a toll.


----------



## Etcetera

MarcB said:


> *Here are some comments on previous posts*
> *at* school (BrE)
> *in* school (AmE) depending on the context AE uses both


Could you please explain that? In which contexts does AmE use "at"?


----------



## Sallyb36

Hockey13 said:


> Judging by the music you Brits must receive from us, I can't blame you, but try not to knock our entire music scene based on the pop. You did produce the Spice Girls, after all.



I love lots of American music as well as British.  The classic ones like the Eagles, Beach boys, as well as Fun Lovin' Criminals, and lots of others.  This will be deleted as chat!!


----------



## MarcB

Etcetera said:


> Could you please explain that? In which contexts does AmE use "at"?


Hello Etcetera here are two websites with examples 1 2,
I am still in school.=I have not graduated yet. I am still at school.= I have not left yet.(today)


----------



## Etcetera

I see now.  Thank you, Marc!


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Etcetera said:


> As far as I know, the Americans often prefer to use Past Simple where the British use Present Perfect. For example:
> - I have just bought a ticket. (BrE)
> - I just bought a ticket. (AmE)



That's not a difference. In Ireland they say both all the time and we (apparently) speak British English.

"American" English and "British" English are really one and the same, give or take some spelling and colloquial differences. 

It comes down to this IMO, if you learn "BE" or "AE" at school you can still go to any place where English is spoken and be perfectly understood by everybody. Thus you can class them any way you want but they're still one and the same.

If you want real differences between the same language look at Swiss German and Standard German.


----------



## Victoria32

Setwale_Charm said:


> the eternal:
> petrol (Br E)
> gas (AmE)
> 
> motorway (BrE)
> highway (AmE)
> 
> Sweets(BrE)
> candies (AmE)
> 
> taxi (BrE)
> cab (AmE)
> 
> pavement (BrE)
> sidewalk (AmE)
> 
> crisps (BrE)
> chips (AmE)
> 
> Chips(BrE)
> French fries (AmE)
> 
> Ok, can somebody think of any differences in grammar or style?


Pronunciation : Schedule, shed-yool (BE) sked-yool (AE)
Style: Fill in (BE) Fill out (AE) when entering information into a form
Vocabulary usage 
Post/mail (for what comes into your letter box).
Some of the differences are subtle but vast. The BE/AE split in NZ is moving from 60/40 in favour of BE to 30/70 in favour of AE, and as I have grown up I have watched (or rather heard it) happen. 
An interesting sociological experience!


----------



## invictaspirit

I have been lead to believe that BE and AE are far more similar to each other than Iberian Spanish and American Spanish, or Iberian Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese.  And I am not aware of any major catastrophes of understanding between those languages.

Few, if any, Americans or Brits will worry or be offended if you speak the other variant.  Even fewer non-native speakers will fail to understand you unless you insist on speaking exactly like someone from the Bronx or the East End.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Matter of fact, I have not come across major differences between European Spanish and Latin American Spanish so far. I do not know how soon I would bump into any differences if I had to study English. 
 It is true that Schwiizertuutsch and Hochdeutsch are very very different , yet only when spoken. I do hear a lot of differences but I do not see them written.

  And I think one can always tell whether it is a Brit or an American speaking simply from the music of his speech.


----------



## Sorcha

> As for the comment on Spanish, there is far less difference between the Spanish of educated people of Spain and the Educated people of Latin America (or Hispanic America) than that in BE and AE.


 
Is that entirely true? Im not convinced, to me there are few enough differences between AE and BE, at least in written terms, aside from simplifications made to BE to form AE. Accent often dominates misuderstanding rather than grammar related issues! This is true among BE speakers and I imagine AE as much as between the two.


----------



## Sorcha

I have also noticed one particular difference, which i personally find irritating because to me it sounds wrong, in BE ; I have not seen him since I was ten.
versus  AE ; I have not seen him since I am ten.
I can see how people prefer BE to AE because it is the original language without oversimplification, from my point of view I am often corrected on minor grammar points and spelling if i speak some one elses language. It seems that oftentimes AE is a mere dilution of BE.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Is a sentence like: I am here for 5 years
 instead of:
 I have been here for 5 years
 also an example of AmE?


----------



## Sorcha

To me the first sounds like you intend on staying in that location for the next 5 years, and the second would appear to convey how long (5 years) you have spent in that place until this point in time. Would you agree?


----------



## MarcB

Comments in prior posts:
Style: Fill in (BE) Fill out (AE) when entering information into a form
Both in AE 
Post/mail (for what comes into your letter box)
AE mail comes from the post office to your mail box brought by the mailman/postman/letter carrier.
I have also noticed one particular difference, which i personally find irritating because to me it sounds wrong, in BE ; I have not seen him since I was ten.
versus AE ; I have not seen him since I am ten.
I have not knowingly heard the I am ten part in AE and it would be wrong.
BE and AE are truly not so different.


Setwale_Charm said:


> Is a sentence like: I am here for 5 years
> instead of:
> I have been here for 5 years
> also an example of AmE?


AE I have been here for 5 years


----------



## maxiogee

The lovely word "on" seem to be under threat of extinction in American English! 

"yada yada yada" the President said Tuesday, 
but 
"waffle waffle waffle" the Queen said on Tuesday


----------



## mplsray

Sorcha said:


> I can see how people prefer BE to AE because it is the original language without oversimplification, from my point of view I am often corrected on minor grammar points and spelling if i speak some one elses language. It seems that oftentimes AE is a mere dilution of BE.


 
The belief that British English is the original and American English an offshoot is an untenable one. BrE and AmE are two branches of the English language which share a common ancestor (or group of ancestors).

I have read arguments from linguists that in the case of Quebec French and American English--I don't know about analogous situations with other languages--the New World version of the language has changed less than the version of the language which was left behind in the original country. If that can indeed be demonstrated, then American English would be closer to the "original language" than would British English, and any argument that British English was somehow more legitimate would be shown to be invalid.

I don't agree with any such legitimacy arguments in any case. I'm just pointing out a logical flaw in statements such as "American English is an offshoot of British English."


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Sorcha said:


> I have also noticed one particular difference, which i personally find irritating because to me it sounds wrong, in BE ; I have not seen him since I was ten.
> versus  AE ; _I have not seen him since I am ten_.



Do Americans really say this? Because if so that's just plainly wrong.


----------



## Etcetera

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Do Americans really say this? Because if so that's just plainly wrong.


It seems to be wrong to me, too.


----------



## almostfreebird

I listen to a lot of rock music, especially what you call classic rock, and a lot of my favorite musicians are from U.K.
A strange thing is: when they(the late John Lennon or Mick Jagger, for example) speak/spoke in iterview or in concert or on movie) they talk like a Englishman, but when I hear what they sing I can't tell the difference.

P.S. I'm a non-native english speaker but speak AE in terms of accents.


----------



## cuchuflete

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Do Americans really say this? Because if so that's just plainly wrong.



I cannot promise that absolutely no American illiterate ever says such a thing, but it is not normal, standard, or frequent AE usage.  It looks/sounds very odd to me.  I've never heard it.


----------



## Outsider

almostfreebird said:


> I listen to a lot of rock music, especially what you call classic rock, and a lot of my favorite musicians are from U.K.
> A strange thing is: when they(the late John Lennon or Mick Jagger, for example) speak/spoke in iterview or in concert or on movie) they talk like a Englishman, but when I hear what they sing I can't tell the difference.


I agree, although I think you can tell the difference, if you listen carefully. Pay attention to how singers pronounce letters like "t" or "a", for example. But, yes, much of the accent becomes indistinguishable in song.


----------



## almostfreebird

I wonder which accents it is, I mean the way Keith Richards speaks. This is a press conference in Japan last year.

http://www.toshiba-emi.co.jp/app/scripts...
006/sp_rs_diary02.rm


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

cuchuflete said:


> I cannot promise that absolutely no American illiterate ever says such a thing, but it is not normal, standard, or frequent AE usage. It looks/sounds very odd to me. I've never heard it.



I thought not. I watch American TV all the time and except for them calling a tap a faucet or something, I don't really hear many differences from English or Australian programs.

As for singers, when someone sings its virtually impossible to pick up where they're from IMO. For example when I hear a Stereophonics song you would hardly think they're Welsh but when you hear the band members speak its a different story.


----------



## emma42

Lots of English/British singers used to sing with American accents, although not all.  This tendency is dying out now.


----------



## don maico

Putting aside the spelling and obvious coloqiolisms, what are the main differences between the two? Gotten is one word I can think that was once  common usage in the UK but ,sensibly,  was replaced with got


----------



## cuchuflete

I minor but immediately obvious difference is the treatment of some collective nouns.  AE typically treats these as singular, while BE sometimes treats the noun as plural.

Example:  (BE) General Electric have announced earnings.
(AE) General Electric has announced earnings.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

don maico said:


> Putting aside the spelling and obvious coloqiolisms, what are the main differnces between the two? Gotten is on word I can think that was once in common usage in the UK but sensibly  was replaced with got



Hmm...we use gotten in Ireland.



Setwale_Charm said:


> Is a sentence like: I am here for 5 years
> instead of:
> I have been here for 5 years
> also an example of AmE?



No that's just bad grammar.

One thing I do notice is Americans call crisps _chips_ and chips _fries_. That always confused me.


----------



## don maico

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Hmm...we use gotten in Ireland.
> 
> 
> 
> No that's just bad grammar.
> 
> One thing I do notice is Americans call crisps _chips_ and chips _fries_. That always confused me.



Short for French fries


----------



## don maico

almostfreebird said:


> I wonder which accents it is, I mean the way Keith Richards speaks. This is a press conference in Japan last year.
> 
> http://www.toshiba-emi.co.jp/app/scripts...
> 006/sp_rs_diary02.rm


English


----------



## Violet Green

zerduja said:


> in my opinion, anyone who understands "queen s english" would be understood in any english speaking country


 
Hi everyone,
I can't


----------



## Violet Green

_


mplsray said:



			The belief that British English is the original and American English an offshoot is an untenable one. BrE and AmE are two branches of the English language which share a common ancestor (or group of ancestors).
		
Click to expand...

_


mplsray said:


> _I don't agree with any such legitimacy arguments in any case. I'm just pointing out a logical flaw in statements such as "American English is an offshoot of British English."_





I agree with you 100 percent, MPLSray... and there are other branches in the English language, too


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Setwale_Charm said:


> It is true that Schwiizertuutsch and Hochdeutsch are very very different , yet only when spoken. I do hear a lot of differences but I do not see them written.


 
 That's because there is no written form of Swiss German, they only write the Standard version.



mplsray said:


> The belief that British English is the original and American English an offshoot is an untenable one. BrE and AmE are two branches of the English language which share a common ancestor (or group of ancestors).



You do have a point but then again many changes in the way Americans write English were randomly introduced by Noah Webster in 1828 to show that Americans were different from their (ex) English masters. So in that case many of the spellings that AE uses is indeed an offshoot from their original form.

As for the spoken language, everywhere English is spoken there are different forms. I'd personally rate the English of western Ireland as almost unintelligble to someone who isn't used to their speech be they American, English, Australian or whatever.

I dunno it seems everyone is obsessed with pointing out the relatively (minor) differences in both. But knowing the US I wouldn't be surprised if in 100 years they were calling the language American.


----------



## Violet Green

Hi again,
many people already call the English spoken in America "American".


----------



## emma42

Re Almostfreebird's post #71.  I understand where your confusion comes from;  Keith Richards is English, but he is speaking in a rather drawling, American way, often found amongst English rock stars of a certain era.  They seem to pick it up somehow.


----------



## GenJen54

Violet Green said:


> Hi again,
> many people already call the English spoken in America "American".


 
Hi Violet, 

Who are these "many people?"  People in England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland?  I'm afraid the majority of "Americans" just call our langauge "English."


----------



## JamesM

GenJen54 said:


> Hi Violet,
> 
> Who are these "many people?" People in England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland? I'm afraid the majority of "Americans" just call our langauge "English."


 
In fact, I've never heard an American say call our language "American" except as a joke. "Don't mind me... I speak American."


----------



## emma42

American English is an off-shoot of "English" English in the sense that without "English" English there could not be American English.


----------



## GenJen54

emma42 said:


> American English is an off-shoot of "English" English in the sense that without "English" English there could not be American English.


That's not the issue. I know that _technically_, the language is called  Standard American English, SAE for short.  That is rarely used outside of linguistic circles, however.  "We" as average Joes and Janes simply don't call it "American."  We call it English.


----------



## JamesM

emma42 said:


> American English is an off-shoot of "English" English in the sense that without "English" English there could not be American English.


 
Well, but depending on how far back you want to go, I think you could make a case that English English is an offshoot of Norman French, since without Norman French there would be no English English, at least not in its current form.


----------



## cuchuflete

H.L. Mencken's *The American Language* *An Inquiry into the Development of English in the United States* 
was published in 1921.  It still makes for fine, entertaining reading.   You can find it—in its entirety—online here.


----------



## JamesM

cuchuflete said:


> H.L. Mencken's *The American Language* *An Inquiry into the Development of English in the United States*
> was published in 1921. It still makes for fine, entertaining reading. You can find it—in its entirety—online here.


 
Thanks for the link, cuchuflete.  That looks like interesting reading.

Do you know anyone personally, though, that calls our language "American"?


----------



## mplsray

emma42 said:


> American English is an off-shoot of "English" English in the sense that without "English" English there could not be American English.


 
What linguists call _English English_ is a contemporary dialect of British English. American English did not derive from that dialect. Rather, English English, other contemporary British English dialects, and contemporary American English dialects all share common ancestors. If American English is an "offshoot," then English English must be considered one as well. For my part, I would avoid the term _offshoot_ for any dialect of English.


----------



## cuchuflete

JamesM said:


> Do you know anyone personally, though, that calls our language "American"?



I have heard inebriated Americans admonishing people who use words with more than four letters to, "Speak Mairkin ferchrissake!" but other than that, no I do not.


----------



## emma42

Well, I think English English would be better described as a hybrid, rather than  simply an off-shoot of Norman French, as it is, as you probably know, a Germanic language at root, with lots of Latin and French and plenty of other influences.


----------



## JamesM

emma42 said:


> Well, I think English English would be better described as a hybrid, rather than simply an off-shoot of Norman French, as it is, as you probably know, a Germanic language at root, with lots of Latin and French and plenty of other influences.


 
Yes, I agree that it makes sense to call it a hybrid. I was simply making a comment about the statement "because without English English there would be no American English."  Historically, that's accurate.  Linguistically, I don't know that it qualifies it as an "offshoot", as mplsray pointed out.


----------



## mplsray

JamesM said:


> Thanks for the link, cuchuflete. That looks like interesting reading.
> 
> Do you know anyone personally, though, that calls our language "American"?


 
I know Americans, including myself, who refer to American English as _américain_ when speaking French, but it's acceptable when speaking that language.

When speaking English, however, there appear to be only two or three types of Americans who use _American_ for our branch of the English language. 

1) Uneducated people, the same sort of people who would habitually use such terms as _ain't,_ although even among such people, the vast majority would call our language _English._

2) People imitating uneducated speech for humorous effect.

3) A very small number of scholars and writers, among whom are H.L. Mencken, already mentioned, and journalist Robert MacNeil, responsible for the PBS television program _Do You Speak American?_ and the book with the same name.


----------



## emma42

Point taken, JamesM.


----------



## JamesM

> I know Americans, including myself, who refer to American English as _américain_ when speaking French, but it's acceptable when speaking that language


 
Interesting.  So they say, "Je parle américain", not "Je parle anglais"?  That seems odd. "Je suis américain" makes sense to me, but "je parle américain"... that seems odd.


----------



## mplsray

JamesM said:


> Interesting. So they say, "Je parle américain", not "Je parle anglais"? That seems odd. "Je suis américain" makes sense to me, but "je parle américain"... that seems odd.


 
It is odd. No,we'd say _américain_ when some point was being made which involved a distinction between British English and American English: _*Clochard* se traduit par *tramp* en anglais, *bum* en américain._


----------



## mplsray

Pedro y La Torre said:


> That's because there is no written form of Swiss German, they only write the Standard version.


 
In his book _The Power of Babel,_ linguist John McWhorter told of seeing a Swiss man laughing while reading an Asterix book, and concluded that it was not just because the material itself was humorous, but because it was written in Swiss German, which the man was not used to seeing in print.

Here's a confirmation that such Asterix translations exist.


----------



## vince

British English and American English are the same language -- they are merely two dialects (or dialect groups) that differ only in pronunciation, a couple of lexical items, and very minor grammatical features. None of these are enough to impede intelligibility, except for the occasional misunderstanding.

British English and American English are not as far apart as the Spanish dialects. There are far fewer lexical terms that are different in the two dialects. Also, there is greater variety in the grammar of Spanish dialects than in English dialects (and Spanish dialects do not vary THAT much). A major difference is that British and American English pronunciation differs mainly in the _vowels_ while Spanish dialects differ in pronunciation mainly in the _consonants_.



Setwale_Charm said:


> It is true that Schwiizertuutsch and Hochdeutsch are very very different , yet only when spoken. I do hear a lot of differences but I do not see them written.



That's because Schwiizertuutsch-speakers write in Hochdeutsch, a language that most of them also speak. Schwiizertuutsch (a dialect of the Alemannic language) does not have a standardized written form.

This is what Alemannisch looks like when written: http://als.wikipedia.org


----------



## Hockey13

Sorcha said:


> I have also noticed one particular difference, which i personally find irritating because to me it sounds wrong, in BE ; I have not seen him since I was ten.
> versus AE ; I have not seen him since I am ten.
> I can see how people prefer BE to AE because it is the original language without oversimplification, from my point of view I am often corrected on minor grammar points and spelling if i speak some one elses language. It seems that oftentimes AE is a mere dilution of BE.


 
Where did you come up with this?


----------



## maxiogee

Violet Green said:


> Hi everyone,
> I can't



Hi VG, (for value!) 

What can't you ??

The quote to which you responded was an unusually stated case, and one which I think stated the situation perfectly…


			
				zerduja said:
			
		

> in my opinion, anyone who understands "queen s english" would be understood in any english speaking country



If you understand "the Queens English" then you will be able to make yourself understood in any English-speaking country.
Note that zerjuda did not say that you might not need to change your normal speech pattern. 
I think this is a very perceptive comment. The Queen speaks, especially at Christmas, to her Commonwealth. The varieties of English spoken are vast, and yet she needs to be understood by all her listeners. If they can all understand her, regardless of how they normally speak, then they have it within themselves to make themselves understood by any other English speaker.


----------



## emma42

I don't think "the queen's English" is commonly understood to mean the way Elizabeth Windsor speaks.  I think it's understood to mean a generally clear, grammatical way of speaking English English.


----------



## Outsider

vince said:


> British English and American English are the same language -- they are merely two dialects (or dialect groups) that differ only in pronunciation, a couple of lexical items, and very minor grammatical features. None of these are enough to impede intelligibility, except for the occasional misunderstanding.
> 
> British English and American English are not as far apart as the Spanish dialects. There are far fewer lexical terms that are different in the two dialects. Also, there is greater variety in the grammar of Spanish dialects than in English dialects (and Spanish dialects do not vary THAT much). A major difference is that British and American English pronunciation differs mainly in the _vowels_ while Spanish dialects differ in pronunciation mainly in the _consonants_.


You know, I'm always skeptical about comparisons between languages, but I'm especially skeptical when they're made by people who are native speakers of one of the languages in question, but not the other.

I think that tends to cloud their judgement. They tend to downplay the differences within their native language (which they grew up taking for granted), and magnify the ones in the other language (because those are bigger hurdles for them, who are not comfortable in the language).


----------



## Violet Green

Hi everyone,
I'm sure I should have said "a handful" or "a few" instead of "many"...
but I've already been corrected by Americans living in France, with French spouses and children.
For example, when I asked them "do you speak English in the home?"
they answered, perfectly seriously, "we speak American". 
These were educated people.


----------



## Violet Green

mplsray said:


> I know Americans, including myself, who refer to American English as _américain_ when speaking French, but it's acceptable when speaking that language.
> 
> When speaking English, however, there appear to be only two or three types of Americans who use _American_ for our branch of the English language.
> 
> 1) Uneducated people, the same sort of people who would habitually use such terms as _ain't,_ although even among such people, the vast majority would call our language _English._
> 
> 2) People imitating uneducated speech for humorous effect.
> 
> 3) *A very small number of scholars and writers*, among whom are H.L. Mencken, already mentioned, and journalist Robert MacNeil, responsible for the PBS television program _Do You Speak American?_ and the book with the same name.


 
Or maybe, Pedro, they belong to this small group!


----------



## GenJen54

Violet Green said:


> Hi everyone,
> I'm sure I should have said "a handful" or "a few" instead of "many"...
> but I've already been corrected by Americans *living in France*, with *French spouses* and children.
> For example, when I asked them "do you speak English in the home?"
> they answered, perfectly seriously, "we speak American".


 
Let me point out a few bits here. While it is largely probable that many people in Europe and the U.K. use "American" to describe the primary language spoken in the United States, the majority I would wager still use "English."

Educated or not, the people referenced above have the influence of a different culture. They live in a country that is not the U.S. They have the influence of foreign spouses, who speak a language in which "americain" is the proper term for the language. They also have greater access to BBC and other media influences for which "American" is the acceptable term. 

This is a trend that may be catching on in some parts of the U.S., as another forer@ has pointed out. It has not made it to the area where I live, and I still contend that the "majority" of people, if asked, would state that they speak "English," to mean the "variant of English found in the United States."

A misnomer, perhaps. But one which many millions of people, educated and non-educated alike, buy into. 



> These were educated people.


 
So I suppose that since I call the language I speak English and not American, then I am uneducated. 

I guess that also makes the bulk of U.S. colleges and universities having "English" departments and "Professors of English," who teach language, grammar and literature, incorrect.


----------



## Violet Green

mplsray said:


> I know Americans, including myself, who refer to American English as _américain_ when speaking French, but it's acceptable when speaking that language.
> 
> When speaking English, however, there appear to be only two or three types of Americans who use _American_ for our branch of the English language.
> 
> 1) *Uneducated people, the same sort of people who would habitually use such terms as ain't,* although even among such people, the vast majority would call our language _English._
> 
> 2) People imitating uneducated speech for humorous effect.
> 
> 3) A very small number of scholars and writers, among whom are H.L. Mencken, already mentioned, and journalist Robert MacNeil, responsible for the PBS television program _Do You Speak American?_ and the book with the same name.


 
Hi GenJen54,
I was just replying to this idea.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

GenJen54 said:


> Educated or not, the people referenced above have the influence of a different culture. They live in a country that is not the U.S. They have the influence of foreign spouses, who speak a language in which "americain" is the proper term for the language. They also have greater access to BBC and other media influences for which "American" is the acceptable term



Just in reply to this, *américain *the noun relates to Americans in general not the language. One could say _anglais __américain_ but I've never heard anyone refering to the language as _américain_ as there's no such thing as an "American" langauge (excluding the Native American ones obviously).


----------



## GenJen54

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Just in reply to this, *américain *the noun relates to Americans in general not the language. One could say _anglais __américain_ but I've never heard anyone refering to the language as _américain_ as there's no such thing as an "American" langauge (excluding the Native American ones obviously).


As a francophone, I was aware of this usage.  I was replying to mlspray, however, who cites the following:





> I know Americans, including myself, *who refer to American English as américain when speaking French*, but it's acceptable when speaking that language.


----------



## mplsray

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Just in reply to this, *américain *the noun relates to Americans in general not the language. One could say _anglais __américain_ but I've never heard anyone refering to the language as _américain_ as there's no such thing as an "American" langauge (excluding the Native American ones obviously).


 
It is quite common to see in books translated into French from American English the following sentence: _Traduit de l'américain._

I don't think it necessarily follows from that, however, that the French publishing industry considers _américain_ to be a separate language from _anglais._


----------



## Sorcha

Hockey13 said:


> Where did you come up with this?


 

I heard it on three separate occasions, I thought the first time that I had been mistaken so the next time I made sure I had heard it correctly. The one example that springs to mind is an episode of 'Sex and the City', Miranda says 'I havent done that since I'm ten'.


----------



## mplsray

Sorcha said:


> I heard it on three separate occasions, I thought the first time that I had been mistaken so the next time I made sure I had heard it correctly. The one example that springs to mind is an episode of 'Sex and the City', Miranda says 'I havent done that since I'm ten'.


 
It strikes me as a very strange usage, something that only a non-native speaker would say.


----------



## Hockey13

Sorcha said:


> I heard it on three separate occasions, I thought the first time that I had been mistaken so the next time I made sure I had heard it correctly. The one example that springs to mind is an episode of 'Sex and the City', Miranda says 'I havent done that since I'm ten'.


 
I've never heard this and 99% of Americans would not use this structure. Are you sure she wasn't acting  drunk?


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Sorcha said:


> To me the first sounds like you intend on staying in that location for the next 5 years, and the second would appear to convey how long (5 years) you have spent in that place until this point in time. Would you agree?


 
I don`t know. I used to think it completely wrong until I once heard my own father, that type of infallible Oxford highbrow, say this very thing with regard to his assignment abroad.


----------



## shoam

I'm from Argentina and the English I have studied since I was five was Cambridge Institute (British). When I came to the USA (that is where I have lived for the last 7 years, there were people who did not know what I was trying to say or asked for. Furthermore, working as a tour guide, I have had colleagues and clients in my tours from Ireland or England who complaint that Americans did not understand them.
This situation, I believe, is a result of the little exposure of Americans to the world, the poor general education and the little they care about the rest of the world.
Americans had a hard time to understand or misunderstood words like washing powder, washroom (although Canadians use this one), rubber the letter Z, or the name DAN if not pronounced “American”.


----------



## DCPaco

vince said:


> *British English and American English are not as far apart as the Spanish dialects.* There are far fewer lexical terms that are different in the two dialects. Also, there is greater variety in the grammar of Spanish dialects than in English dialects (and Spanish dialects do not vary THAT much). A major difference is that British and American English pronunciation differs mainly in the _vowels_ while Spanish dialects differ in pronunciation mainly in the _consonants_.


 
Wrong!  Sorry, but Spain was a little more militant in Latin America and they pumped the Hispanic world (including all of what was Mexico in the United States) with clerics that brought to Latin America ALL of their knowledge of grammar and language from the Iberian Peninsula.  Contrary to the United States, there was a common source for grammar and orthography:  the Royal Academy of Spain.  The United States decided to make the language its own by refusing certain orthographic nuances as well as certain grammatical structures.  The Spanish of educated people all over the world is one and the same.  Now, if you are speaking of colloquialisms or vernacular speech--that is an entirely different thing because even in the United States you have people from Texas say one thing and the Mid-Atlantic state interpret this entirely different.  If you are speaking of the degeneration of the language, you needn't look further than the Appalachian Mountains--and yes, there are remote regions all over the world where education is deficient and their language is never going to be the standard of their respective country.


----------



## mplsray

DCPaco said:


> Wrong! Sorry, but Spain was a little more militant in Latin America and they pumped the Hispanic world (including all of what was Mexico in the United States) with clerics that brought to Latin America ALL of their knowledge of grammar and language from the Iberian Peninsula. Contrary to the United States, there was a common source for grammar and orthography: the Royal Academy of Spain. The United States decided to make the language its own by refusing certain orthographic nuances as well as certain grammatical structures. The Spanish of


 
I doubt that there was any actual attempt to adopt certain grammatical structures instead of others in American English, with a view to distinguishing it from British English.

In the case of orthography, however, most differences between AmE and BrE are the result of the reforms of Noah Webster, who intended American spelling to be more rational than British spelling. Consider the double-consonant rule: The spelling _traveller_ does not give the reader any indication of where the stress is, while the American variant, _traveler,_ does--the single _l_ indicates that the stress is _not_ in the syllable _vel._ Contrast that with the word _impelled,_ where the double consonant indicates that the stress _is_ on the syllable _pelled._

English spelling is so complicated, that I expect it takes just about as long to learn to spell well in American English as it does to learn to spell well in British English. But at least Webster tried to improve matters.



DCPaco said:


> educated people all over the world is one and the same. Now, if you are speaking of colloquialisms or vernacular speech--that is an entirely different thing because even in the United States you have people from Texas say one thing and the Mid-Atlantic state interpret this entirely different. If you are speaking of the degeneration of the language, you needn't look further than the Appalachian Mountains--and yes, there are remote regions all over the world where education is deficient and their language is never going to be the standard of their respective country.


 
Linguists reject the idea that languages degenerate. On the contrary, languages (and dialects) evolve to fit their environment. If a particular subtlety of vocabulary is no longer needed—for example, the terms used to speak of members of the Russian extended family which were no longer useful after Russia became the Soviet Union—those terms disappear from the dialect or language. If vocabulary is needed—for example the names for various plants and animals in the Appalachian mountains—it is added.

Furthermore, linguists will tell you that _any_ dialect of a full language—that is, anything above the level of a pidgin—is capable of becoming a standard language. _Full language_ includes creole languages as well, which have developed from pidgin languages. From a linguistic point of view, no nonstandard dialect, including Appalachian English, has any sort of inherent defects which would prevent it from being adopted as a standard dialect.

All standard dialects, after all, arose from nonstandard dialects.


----------



## DCPaco

The following is an excellent site, I think, of particular nuances of both registers:

http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~jphb/american.html

"I doubt that there was any *actual attempt to adopt certain grammatical structures* instead of others in American English, *with a view to distinguishing it from British English*."

mplsray:

It would be difficult for me to provide you with a bibliography to support this argument; however, I do offer this article from wikipedia, which appears fairly sound:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster

These are the aspects that I found interesting in it that are related to my claim:

"His most important improvement, he claimed, was *to rescue* of [sic] 'our native tongue' *from *'the clamor of pedantry' that surrounded *English grammar and pronunciation. He complained that the English language had been corrupted by the British aristocracy*, which set its own standard for proper spelling and pronunciation. Webster rejected the notion that the study of Greek and Latin must precede the study of English grammar. The appropriate standard for the American language, argued Webster, was 'the same republican principles as American civil and ecclesiastical constitutions,' which meant that the people-at-large must control the language; *popular sovereignty in government must be accompanied by popular usage in language.*"

"Part three of his _Grammatical Institute_ (1785) was a reader designed to uplift the mind and '*diffuse the principles of virtue and patriotism.*'"


----------



## roxcyn

I thought this article would interest you all:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_vs_American_English


----------



## mplsray

DCPaco said:


> The following is an excellent site, I think, of particular nuances of both registers:
> 
> http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~jphb/american.html
> 
> "I doubt that there was any *actual attempt to adopt certain grammatical structures* instead of others in American English, *with a view to distinguishing it from British English*."
> 
> mplsray:
> 
> It would be difficult for me to provide you with a bibliography to support this argument; however, I do offer this article from wikipedia, which appears fairly sound:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster
> 
> These are the aspects that I found interesting in it that are related to my claim:
> 
> "His most important improvement, he claimed, was *to rescue* of [sic] 'our native tongue' *from *'the clamor of pedantry' that surrounded *English grammar and pronunciation. He complained that the English language had been corrupted by the British aristocracy*, which set its own standard for proper spelling and pronunciation. Webster rejected the notion that the study of Greek and Latin must precede the study of English grammar. The appropriate standard for the American language, argued Webster, was 'the same republican principles as American civil and ecclesiastical constitutions,' which meant that the people-at-large must control the language; *popular sovereignty in government must be accompanied by popular usage in language.*"
> 
> "Part three of his _Grammatical Institute_ (1785) was a reader designed to uplift the mind and '*diffuse the principles of virtue and patriotism.*'"


 
I was not disagreeing with the point that Noah Webster wished American English to be recognized as clearly distinct from British English. However, I think you have misinterpreted what his position was in relation to grammar.

Webster was an interesting combination of prescriptivist and descriptivist. He was a prescriptivist in his role as a spelling reformer. He was descriptivist in his role as a grammarian. He was opposed to those who we now call the "traditional grammarians" and "prescriptivist grammarians," and was also opposed to teaching English grammar from the viewpoint of Latin and Greek grammar. I know of no attempt by him to teach grammar which did not reflect the actual grammar of educated speakers of English, and there was little or no difference between AmE and BrE grammar at the time. (They are still exceedingly close, in fact.) For example, Webster regretted that the traditional grammarians had managed to push the double negative out of the standard language, but he made no attempt to bring it back.

Not all British grammarians were prescriptive grammarians, by the way. In fact, the first scientific grammar—one which we would today describe as a descriptive grammar—was the 1761 work _Rudiments of English Grammar,_ written by Joseph Priestley (known among other things as the discoverer of oxygen). Webster had read Priestley's work.


----------



## buddywally

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Hmm...we use gotten in Ireland.
> 
> 
> 
> No that's just bad grammar.
> 
> One thing I do notice is Americans call crisps _chips_ and chips _fries_. That always confused me.


 
Well, in Ireland we do have our own form of english, called Hiberno-English which comes from how Gaelic influenced the way our ancestors learned english.. One of the big differences from any other form of english is that Irish people tend not to make statements that are positive or negative,we don't commit ourselves e.g. the word "grand" can be used in any situation, be it good or bad..THere is also our tendency to respond to a question with another question(this could just be a quirk). Maybe these are culturally and historically influenced?Although the english spoken in Ireland is not incredibly different and at the same time the english grammar we learn in school is BrE.
As regards differences between AmE and BrE, I was on a 6 month teaching work-experience in Argentina. My boss preffered to teach BrE... She had bought a book for 7-10 year olds, but was disappointed when she realised it was AmE..One of the teaching points in the book was children talking about their games/hobbies...
e.g I like *to play* tennis.
     I like *to read *books.
     I like *to watch* tv.
etc.
The infinitive was used in all of these.
It dawned on me that I would never say something like this. I or any Irish person(English too) I know would say....
I like *playing* football.
I like *watching *tv.
I like *reading*.
Its a smalll difference, and in my opinion as long as you can speak either Imperialist English , you'll be understood and you'll be grand.
I learned to speak Spanish first in Argentina, then Sevilla...and I just speak the spanish that seems natural to me. It might sound strange to some but thats their problem


----------



## cuchuflete

Given the huge number of Irish immigrants to the US, and their considerable influences on AE, shouldn't you call that variety
Hiberno-Imperialist?


----------



## buddywally

cuchuflete said:


> Given the huge number of Irish immigrants to the US, and their considerable influences on AE, shouldn't you call that variety
> Hiberno-Imperialist?


No, I'd call it Hiberno-Colonist.


----------



## djchak

shoam said:


> I'm from Argentina and the English I have studied since I was five was Cambridge Institute (British). When I came to the USA (that is where I have lived for the last 7 years, there were people who did not know what I was trying to say or asked for. Furthermore, working as a tour guide, I have had colleagues and clients in my tours from Ireland or England who complaint that Americans did not understand them.
> This situation, I believe, is a result of the little exposure of Americans to the world, the poor general education and the little they care about the rest of the world.
> Americans had a hard time to understand or misunderstood words like washing powder, washroom (although Canadians use this one), rubber the letter Z, or the name DAN if not pronounced “American”.





Ahh, all the fault of the ignorant Americans, not knowing British English and it's colloquialisms. More proof that they could care less about the rest of the world! If they only learned that the rest of the world around them spoke proper English the correct way, perhaps they could rise up and do something useful.
But until then they are doomed to linguistic squalor.


----------



## bombadil

I think there's much more difference in slang between BE and AE than there is in more "standard" speech. I understand that the Harry Potter books were published in separate editions for Britain and America, with the (original) British version containg a great deal of slang that Americans would not even understand. I haven't seen the British version, but I've been told that the title of the first book is "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone," whereas the American title is "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." Apparently American readers can't be expected to know what "Philospher's Stone" refers to. 

In general, I have the impression that British schoolchildren are taught a higher level of writing skills than is the norm in the US, by the way.


----------



## Hockey13

shoam said:


> I'm from Argentina and the English I have studied since I was five was Cambridge Institute (British). When I came to the USA (that is where I have lived for the last 7 years, there were people who did not know what I was trying to say or asked for. Furthermore, working as a tour guide, I have had colleagues and clients in my tours from Ireland or England who complaint that Americans did not understand them.
> This situation, I believe, is a result of the little exposure of Americans to the world, the poor general education and the little they care about the rest of the world.
> Americans had a hard time to understand or misunderstood words like washing powder, washroom (although Canadians use this one), rubber the letter Z, or the name DAN if not pronounced “American”.


 
You're right. I don't care about the rest of the world and nobody understand Brits because they speak a slightly different flavor of English. When they say "lift" instead of "elevator," I grow so angry that I just want to invade another country and watch game shows. If someone ever gives me a book, I insist that it have an American flag on it, otherwise I won't read it. If anything in it strikes me as anything even remotely approaching UNAMERICAN, I once again grow angry and throw that book out the window at any evil immigrants I see walking by.

I'd like to point out that I disagree with your post so much that it almost hurts to respond to it. I haven't the first clue what "washing powder" is, so would you like to please explain it to me, oh high and mighty Cambridge Institute fellow? Would you like me to rattle off the list of hundreds of American phrases a speaker of BE might trip over? I am normally the last person to say "if you don't like this country then you kin giiiiiiiit out," but honestly, if you think we're all a bunch of dolts, you don't have to live amongst the slime, oh Albert Einstein.


----------



## Hockey13

bombadil said:


> I think there's much more difference in slang between BE and AE than there is in more "standard" speech. I understand that the Harry Potter books were published in separate editions for Britain and America, with the (original) British version containg a great deal of slang that Americans would not even understand. I haven't seen the British version, but I've been told that the title of the first book is "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone," whereas the American title is "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." Apparently American readers can't be expected to know what "Philospher's Stone" refers to.
> 
> In general, I have the impression that British schoolchildren are taught a higher level of writing skills than is the norm in the US, by the way.


 
What good are generalities like these other than to prejudice an entire group of people? If you don't mind, I prefer not to be thrown into the "poor writer" pile. My education was A+, if you'll excuse the phrase.


----------



## cuchuflete

bombadil said:


> Apparently American readers can't be expected to know what "Philospher's Stone" refers to.



Sad, but true.  Ever since most schools were forced to drop the Alchemy portion of the curriculum, in response to No Child Left Behooved, the target demographic for Harry Potter stories has sunk into abysmal ignorance of magic powders and such.  Your average Chav, on the other hand, has some acquaintence with matters of this sort, but is not known to appreciate juvenile literature lacking graphical depictions of things Americans speak of only in whispers.  

We should all hold hands, and cry with shame.

Which all reminds me very little of the time I used terms like gerrymandering and 'pork barrel spending' in front of some English friends.  Their eyes counter-rotated at high speed.


----------



## malonso2

These posts don't seem to have anything to do with the topic, but while were at it.

I know what the Philosopher's stone though I guess in Britain you teach about the    " "Philospher's Stone"  " Originally Posted by *bombadil* 

and what Americans apparently don't know about.  

For the post at hand - English took over when Britain was top "dawg" - the American form is taking root while it is top of the chain.  You will keep your version as every country keeps their own language.  Language transmits culture and pride.

Why hate on America?  Don't see anyone hammering on all your drunk alcoholic kids all ever BBC news typing poorly about how they get drunk every weekend.  Where everyone in America can wonder where are the parents at?  Not to say American kids are drunk fools to... but alcoholics at 16?  Sweeping generalization for sure.

Our school systems?  You mean the ones everyone wants to send their kids to from all over the world?

People here come from all over - sure we have our stupid people - this forum shows you have your ignorant folks also.  Get back to the topic rather then bashing please.  Please excuse my impulse to poke fun.  I mean really where do you get your impressions from?  Do you watch bimbidy Paris Hilton on Mtv or Jerry Springer for your information?

Just for fun - I first learned about the philosophers stone watching Johnny Quest


----------



## Brioche

shoam said:


> I'm from Argentina and the English I have studied since I was five was Cambridge Institute (British). When I came to the USA (that is where I have lived for the last 7 years, there were people who did not know what I was trying to say or asked for. Furthermore, working as a tour guide, I have had colleagues and clients in my tours from Ireland or England who complaint that Americans did not understand them.
> This situation, I believe, is a result of the little exposure of Americans to the world, the poor general education and the little they care about the rest of the world.
> Americans had a hard time to understand or misunderstood words like washing powder, washroom (although Canadians use this one), rubber the letter Z, or the name DAN if not pronounced “American”.


 
I'd agree about exposure to the world.

The average non-US speaker of English has seen hundreds of US films and television shows. She has heard thousands of US pop songs. So she has a fair bit of knowledge about US speech.

How many English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Australian, South African or New Zealand films or television shows would Miss Average America have seen?

Americans don't travel outside their own country as much as many other folk. In part, it's not necessary. The US can provide an unlimited variety of vacation destinations.


----------



## Hockey13

Brioche said:


> I'd agree about exposure to the world.
> 
> The average non-US speaker of English has seen hundreds of US films and television shows. She has heard thousands of US pop songs. So she has a fair bit of knowledge about US speech.
> 
> How many English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Australian, South African or New Zealand films or television shows would Miss Average America have seen?
> 
> Americans don't travel outside their own country as much as many other folk. In part, it's not necessary. Wanna ski? Lie on the beach? Surf? Freeze on a mountain? Bake in a desert? Commune with nature? Buzz in cities that never sleep? Blow it all in a casino? See a ballet? Hear an orchestra? The US can provide all that, and more.


 
That is a good point, but we're also quite far away from everyone else. Us northerners travel to Canada a bunch...I know I used to go every summer for hockey camp. Mexico is a bit of a thorny issue, but many Californians do head down for a jaunt in Mexico. However, I must remind you that the average American is not quite as poorly traveled as you might suspect. Go to the "streets" of Venice or le vie di Roma and you'll see quite a large amount of American tourists along with the British and German ones. Practically everyone I know my age has travelled to Europe at least once, and many others have been to Africa on service missions. Admittedly, this is something more often done by those who are somewhat privileged, but I think that is the case in every country. We are exposed to a fair amount of British music and we have been since The Beatles. Lots of people I know are into The Streets (or at least was last year or the year before). I don't know what to tell you about the movies. We get foreign movies here, but not so much. If foreign countries want to knock down the movie cartel that is Hollywood, be my guest. I'm not opposed to it.


----------



## Hockey13

malonso2 said:


> People here come from all over - sure we have our stupid people - this forum shows you have your ignorant folks also. Get back to the topic rather then bashing please. Please excuse my impulse to poke fun. I mean really where do you get your impressions from? *Do you watch bimbidy Paris Hilton on Mtv or Jerry Springer for your information?*
> 
> Just for fun - I first learned about the philosophers stone watching Johnny Quest


 
I agree with this part of malonso's post. It is funny to me sometimes the broad generalizations people make about Americans based on what they see on entertainment shows, or the quick labelling of American music based on what they hear on their radio as if their limited experience with our "cream of the crop" pop is an adequate sample of our music. If a non-American on this forum can tell me something about Virginia Coalition, Autopassion, Guster, House of Heroes, etc. etc., I'd be pleasantly surprised, but I've never come across a foreigner who knows much music other than what has been exported. Imagine if all Italians were considered to be exact replicas of Roberto Benigni. Or how about other broad generalizations people make about Americans such as obesity rates? How many times have I been in Europe and had people call me on of those "fat Americans" (and I am, by the way, extraordinarily fit) as if European obesity rates aren't almost exactly the same as American ones and as if Europeans are somehow all superior to Americans because of a variance of two or three percentage points on a statistic that measures something about a _total population of people_. I'm a German citizen as well and I get embarassed by any Germans who make such generalizations. Yes there is a problem, but to use that problem for one's own advantage? 

Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I'm quite fed up.


----------



## badgrammar

Violet Green said:


> Hi everyone,
> I'm sure I should have said "a handful" or "a few" instead of "many"...
> but I've already been corrected by Americans living in France, with French spouses and children.
> For example, when I asked them "do you speak English in the home?"
> they answered, perfectly seriously, "we speak American".
> These were educated people.



That is absolutely absurd.

As an anglophone (not an americanophone) living in France, I can tell you that it is the French who ask "alors tu parles américain?", and AE speakers who consistently respond "Non, je parle anglais, enfin, l'anglais américain."  

I don't know a single person who considers the language they speak "American".  It is English.  I conduct English seminars to bankers.  I don't conduct American classes, although it may come up that I am American, and as such, my accent, spelling, and certain vocabulary choices reflect that.  

From reading through this rather long thread, aside from the aforementioned spelling, vocabulary and pronunciation issues, why are so many of you grasping at straws?  Some of my favorite examples offered as "proof" of how different the dialects are:

1) exceptional grammatical errors that someone heard and that are in no way representative of standard use (re: "I haven't seen him since I am ten").  It's wrong on both sides of the Atlantic.  It's not because some goober said it that it is representative of usage.

2) variations on prepositional use such as in school/at school, which are actually interchangeably used and in no way impede comprehension, create confusion, or are considered incorrect.

3) "Taxi" is British, and "cab" is AE...  I loved that little Deniro movie came out a few ears back, with that nutsy cabbie named Trevor...  What was it called?  Oh yeah, "Cab".  Is that right?   

The differences are there, and interesting to look at.  But American is NOT a language, and I have not read a post from a single AMerican English speaker who has said "I speak American" on this thread.  

As soon as I read a post where a person who grew up in the U.S. says "The language I speak is American", then I'll begin to believe that some speakers of this variant consider it a seperate language. 

 "Je parle américain".  Never heard it, never seen it. 

P.S.  We grew up with PBS watching Monty Python, Benny Hill, Faulty Towers, Masterpiece Theater, All Creatures Great and Small, and so on and so forth...  And that was in Texas beginning in the 70's.


----------

