Posted: Apr 03, 2012 5:33 am
The only real difference I can see in written English (I know that different areas have different words for things, but more about this later) is the use of the letter "z" in American English in place of "s" and "s" in place of "c" in some instances, also the removal of the "u" in some words:
organisation - organization
defence - defense
humour - humor; labour - labor etc.
I'm working on something at the moment that involves submissions in English from people all around the world. So I'm getting the opportunity to observe the errors that even very well educated people, who claim to be "fluent" in English make in their language usage. The most common one, and one that our Afrikaans-speakers make, is the confusion about singular verbs with plural subjects:
Cats are able to see at night
A cat is able to see at night
It seems that northern Europeans have this problem, which is why it's a problem in Afrikaans:
Katte kan in die donker sien; 'n kat kan in die donker sien.
Another problem is the use of articles, also by Northern Europeans, this I understand is due to the various changes in the way nouns are written to include the article. Still, it is not instilled in Northern Europeans when they write in English:
Cat is able to see in dark, instead of A cat is able to see in the dark.
I have a very good friend who I chat with on another site and who I've known for a long time, he does this and refuses to either apologise for it or to make the change. I forgive him because I am amazed at how many Northern Europeans are able to communicate in English, whereas we English-speakers simply don't learn other languages without motivation. I wish I had the ability to even speak Afrikaans fluently. I can make myself understood definitely not write an essay in Afrikaans or even order a meal. I've tried learning other languages but I simply don't have the brain for language.
The other difference in American and British English is the use of "c" and "u." I can understand why it was changed, it's easier to use an "s" for a soft "c" sound as in "defence" and to omit the "u" in "humour, labour." It's also confusing when you spell in British English and use "humour" but "humorous" "rigour" but "rigorous" dropping the "u" just makes sense. Also when computers insist on self-correcting to the American default, it's a pain to go back and change it.
In the rest of the world, it appears that word order is the problem. The work I'm reading involves having to edit the pieces of work into a uniform language, i.e. removing the US spelling and fixing the missing articles and re-ordering sentences written in the way non-English speakers' own languages are written. It's been very interesting actually seeing Japanese and Chinese English written in formal writing and having to change the word order around. Also pieces written by South Americans and Southern Europeans: Spanish, Portuguese and Italian speakers. Even the use of punctuation that I didn't realise before. I'm learning more than the content of the abstracts, I'm also learning about the structure of the native languages merely from the way they write in English.
On the dialect thing. It's definitely only a spoken issue. Now that Globe has mentioned it, I'm becoming more aware of it in even American TV shows and certainly among English nationals. It doesn't apply to the written word though. There are no dialects in the written word, which is probably why I'm not that aware of it. I'm told that there is formal German and informal German. I wouldn't know. Is formal written German more stilted than the more informal version? I would think it would only apply to the spoken form?
organisation - organization
defence - defense
humour - humor; labour - labor etc.
I'm working on something at the moment that involves submissions in English from people all around the world. So I'm getting the opportunity to observe the errors that even very well educated people, who claim to be "fluent" in English make in their language usage. The most common one, and one that our Afrikaans-speakers make, is the confusion about singular verbs with plural subjects:
Cats are able to see at night
A cat is able to see at night
It seems that northern Europeans have this problem, which is why it's a problem in Afrikaans:
Katte kan in die donker sien; 'n kat kan in die donker sien.
Another problem is the use of articles, also by Northern Europeans, this I understand is due to the various changes in the way nouns are written to include the article. Still, it is not instilled in Northern Europeans when they write in English:
Cat is able to see in dark, instead of A cat is able to see in the dark.
I have a very good friend who I chat with on another site and who I've known for a long time, he does this and refuses to either apologise for it or to make the change. I forgive him because I am amazed at how many Northern Europeans are able to communicate in English, whereas we English-speakers simply don't learn other languages without motivation. I wish I had the ability to even speak Afrikaans fluently. I can make myself understood definitely not write an essay in Afrikaans or even order a meal. I've tried learning other languages but I simply don't have the brain for language.
The other difference in American and British English is the use of "c" and "u." I can understand why it was changed, it's easier to use an "s" for a soft "c" sound as in "defence" and to omit the "u" in "humour, labour." It's also confusing when you spell in British English and use "humour" but "humorous" "rigour" but "rigorous" dropping the "u" just makes sense. Also when computers insist on self-correcting to the American default, it's a pain to go back and change it.
In the rest of the world, it appears that word order is the problem. The work I'm reading involves having to edit the pieces of work into a uniform language, i.e. removing the US spelling and fixing the missing articles and re-ordering sentences written in the way non-English speakers' own languages are written. It's been very interesting actually seeing Japanese and Chinese English written in formal writing and having to change the word order around. Also pieces written by South Americans and Southern Europeans: Spanish, Portuguese and Italian speakers. Even the use of punctuation that I didn't realise before. I'm learning more than the content of the abstracts, I'm also learning about the structure of the native languages merely from the way they write in English.
On the dialect thing. It's definitely only a spoken issue. Now that Globe has mentioned it, I'm becoming more aware of it in even American TV shows and certainly among English nationals. It doesn't apply to the written word though. There are no dialects in the written word, which is probably why I'm not that aware of it. I'm told that there is formal German and informal German. I wouldn't know. Is formal written German more stilted than the more informal version? I would think it would only apply to the spoken form?