UK English Grammar vs. US English Grammar

Reading various forums and TW multiplayer foyers made me realize how different UK grammar is from US grammar. The ones we are pretty much aware of is the spelling and what we call certain things. Examples would be 'honour' vs. 'honor' and 'valour' vs. 'valor', or how we call things such as 'football' vs. 'soccer' and 'lift' vs. 'elevator'.

I noticed more differences from novels. The British use single quotes (') while the Americans use double quotes (") when quoting a character. Examples:
'I went there,' she said.
"I went there," she said.
What confuses me is that old British novels used double quotes.-> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/IS...gamesA/#reader Maybe it's because the book in that link is an American version. I'll check Tolkien's books.

I wonder. Do the British and the Americans get annoyed when they see grammar different from their's? Also, what are the other differences in English grammar? And what about Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa? I started to be aware (and worry) of how I write in English when I started to chat with the world.

They are wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaka_Khan

Do the British and the Americans get annoyed when they see grammar different from their's?

---

Or, perhaps more importantly, is this apostrophe correctly placed?

Australia does the language correctly.

We speak Australian.

Its "text" a single is more a double used. Used to be the other way around, but has changed, I was informed.

Its gray. Gray is a colour.

Grammar... whatever MS Office says is correct is correct of course. So in NSW because the primary school teachers cannot figure out how to change the region to Australia, it is kept to the default of American English.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Grammar... whatever MS Office says is correct is correct of course. So in NSW because the primary school teachers cannot figure out how to change the region to Australia, it is kept to the default of American English.

---

That's hilarious :laugh4:


Anyone who cares about grammar and spelling to that degree needs to chill out.

And yeah, obviously American grammar is the correct version.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaka_Khan

What confuses me is that old British novels used double quotes

---

Yes, and British also began using the 's' instead of 'z' (ise vs ize) which is a French influence, in the late 1900s. Oxford English still retains the original spelling. I personally prefer British English, and that is what they taught me in Russia, where I spent the majority of my life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

That's hilarious :laugh4:

Anyone who cares about grammar and spelling to that degree needs to chill out.

And yeah, obviously American grammar is the correct version.

---

I actually don't mind if we choose a grammar set for a reason. I do mind choosing one out of a lack of interest, stupidity or lack of motivation as displayed by said "'teachers'".

And yes primary school teachers who teach the basics should care about spelling and grammar. However most schools do not explicitly teach English grammar as it is assumed that one will absorb it in an English speaking society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaka_Khan

I wonder. Do the British and the Americans get annoyed when they see grammar different from their's?

---

I can't speak for the British but every American I know rages out when they see the difference.

I use American and British English interchangeably, I've never been bothered by either.

It always seems the British folks get most perturbed because we don't use superfluous 'u's and the like.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

Australia does the language correctly.

---

No we don't. We spell "jail" as "gaol".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

I can't speak for the British but every American I know rages out when they see the difference.

---

The British rage inside. The perceptive will note a slight twitching of the upper lip in the more excitable of young women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

No we don't. We spell "jail" as "gaol".

---

Gaol is correct. It's the difference between Jeffrey and Geoffrey. I mean, c'mon, Jeffrey Chaucer dunt really cut it, does it? :laugh4:

Quote:

---

UK English Grammar vs. US English Grammar

---

There's a difference?:inquisitive:

I usually speak Estonian English(English with many many many spelling mistakes) and I'm proud of it!:smash:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

It always seems the British folks get most pertrbed because we don't use sperflos 'u's and the like.

CR

---

I don't actually mind how people spell words, as long as it's correct in their country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

I don't actually mind houw people spell words, as long as it's correct in their cuountry.

---

I suppose you're the exception that proves the rule.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

No we don't. We spell "jail" as "gaol".

---

Interchangeble.

We don't give enough of a crap.

You write it and if you can read it, its good enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Or, perhaps more importantly, is this apostrophe correctly placed?

---

Of course not. I just recently explained it to a good orgah friend via PM, being the grammar nazi that I am and I can do it here again:

boat - singular
boats - plural
boat's - genitive singular ("the boat's deck" meaning the deck belonging to the boat)
boats' - genitive plural

The above is obviously a progressive pronoun which I actually didn't know myself but I knew you leave the apostrophe out, which is all that counts. :laugh4: :sweatdrop:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

I use American and British English interchangeably, I've never been bothered by either.

---

So do I, we shortly talked about the differences at school I think and our teachers mostly just said we should decide for one and be consistent, which I'm not, I often decide for the British though, possibly because I just like to hear them speak. :laugh4:

I doubt either version is correct and I doubt most people really care (I don't). The missing letter 'u' is wrong, not sure where that originates, but apart from that both versions of english have diversified from their roots. It's the same as the pronunciation of c in Spain. If you go to South America it's pronounced normally, like an s, and not with the lisp sound. The South American version is closer to the original Spanish, where the Spanish version evolved separately.

:bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asai Nagamasa

I doubt either version is correct and I doubt most people really care (I don't). The missing letter 'u' is wrong, not sure where that originates, but apart from that both versions of english have diversified from their roots. It's the same as the pronunciation of c in Spain. If you go to South America it's pronounced normally, like an s, and not with the lisp sound. The South American version is closer to the original Spanish, where the Spanish version evolved separately.

:bow:

---

The original root of English was correct, but over the years we developed an even more correct version of English, and with each passing day we correct it even more. The Americans, sadly, have decided not to follow our progress, and are thus left behind in the linguistic race.

I think the English have the final say on this, because afterall, it is called English.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

P.S. Please rename the thread title to "UK English Grammar vs. US English Grammer" , it is closer to the truth.

We were taught "British English" in secondary school.

Nowadays, I probably use both "American English" and "British English" without realising which English I'm using, since I'm not a native speaker.

Errbody need tha chill aight? Yall kno we borrowed words from da Romans? Errthang is correct and we just gotta learn da difference and enlightenize ourselves.

Edit - English is the most inconsistent language that I know of when it comes to grammar and pronunciation. I was walking down the street wearing my new pair of shoes while eating pear.

Here we seem to be swifting from UK english to US english. When I was in school we had to talk with a british accent, which I always refused, I am Dutch not English so I speak English with a big fat Dutch accent and they can understand me just fine.

Who cares about small minority variants of English, like British or American? :book:

Europe alone has more English speakers than the entire Anglophone world. So does India.


So we'll take it from here, thank you very much.


English will develop further as a minority dialect in Britain and the US. Just like Latin evolved into minority dialects in Rome and Milan, variants that soon were mutually unintelligable to each other. Italian dialects that soon were useless in the world at large.
Meanwhile, the civilized world took over Latin from them. Then build a pan-European civilization around it for the next 1500 years. This is the future of English too. Soon, the English and Americans will have the disadvantage of speaking a useless minority variant while four billion others will speak the global standard English.


(Revenge is ours, we'll beat you at your own game, serves you right for picking the wrong language as the global standard etc etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Here we seem to be swifting from UK english to US english. When I was in school we had to talk with a british accent, which I always refused, I am Dutch not English so I speak English with a big fat Dutch accent and they can understand me just fine.

---

That's just rude. You should always make an effort to adopt the accent of your listener. Follow the admirable example of Shteve Mclaren.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Who cares about small minority variants of English, like British or American? :book:

Europe alone has more English speakers than the entire Anglophone world. So does India.


So we'll take it from here, thank you very much.


English will develop further as a minority dialect in Britain and the US. Just like Latin evolved into minority dialects in Rome and Milan, variants that soon were mutually incomprehensible to each other.
Meanwhile, the civilized world took over Latin from them. Then build a pan-European civilization around it for the next 1500 years. This is the future of English too. Soon, the English and Americans will have the disadvantage of speaking a useless minority variant while four billion others will speak the global standard English.


(Revenge is ours, we'll beat you at your own game, serves you right for picking the wrong language as the global standard etc etc)

---

and there's more English speakers in China than in the rest of the world put together. Weep you Francophones. :whip: :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

That's just rude. You should always make an effort to adopt the accent of your listener. Follow the admirable example of Shteve Mclaren.

---

If they have a problem with that then that's their problem. Not going to talk as if I have a hot potato stuck in my throat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

If they have a problem with that then that's their problem. Not going to talk as if I have a hot potato stuck in my throat.

---

An old freind of mine from Aalsmeer said exactley that. Talking English was like talking with a hot potato in his mouth. Serves you all right. :laugh4: