British and American English (885 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 0.5 on 13 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by <copeland.michael.at.sbcglobal.net> (View user info) at 2004-03-07 02:59:54 EST
Apparently, the difference in British and American English isn't just in the spelling. I've recently discovered that words change meaning as they cross the Atlantic, at least according to the people at the Cambridge Dictionary.
For the few that don't know, the Cambridge Dictionary is one of the world's most popular English dictionary, and it's published out of the U.K. However, the good people at Cambridge offer different versions, the British versions "The Learner's" and "Advance Learner's" edition; and an American version, "The Cambridge Dictionary of American English."
When you compare the American and British Editions, you find subtle differences in the definitions that either are the cause or effect of the different way we view controversial social issues. Some examples:
SOCIALISM
American version:
"any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production."
Hmm... sounds kinda bad. Government owns and controls everything important...
don't think I like that at all..
British version:
"the set of beliefs which states that all people are equal and should share equally in the wealth of the country, or the political systems based on these beliefs"
Yeah, All people are equal! Share and share alike I say!
See how those two are kind of the same, yet different?
SEXISM:
American version:
"actions based on a belief that particular jobs and activities are suitable only for women and others are suitable only for men"
Once again, not completely correct, but it doesn't sound too bad.
British version:
"(actions based on) the belief that the members of one sex are less intelligent, able, skilful, etc. than the members of the other sex, especially that women are less able than men"
Clearly, that's much worse.
COMMUNISM
American version:
"an economic system based on public ownership of property and control of the methods of production, and in which no person profits from the work of others"
British version:
"the belief in a society without different classes in which the methods of production are owned and controlled by all its members and everyone works as much as they can and receives what they need"
Both of the above may be true, but as you can see, one emphasizes "a society without classes" and how everyone owns everything and receives what they need. The other simply says nobody profits from the work of others.
Anyway, I don't know why a dictionary publisher would make those sorts of changes between editions. I wonder if it reflects a true difference in opinion in what words mean, or if we simply emphasize different aspects of philosophies according to the center position of our countries.
Biloba
User Reviews
Submitted by hairycoo (user info) at 2004-03-08 05:36:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
oh the irony of this. american government able to manipulate the meaning of a word purely for cold war macarthur style propaganda. the definition that they have changed these words to explains their actions precisely while they change it. now theres nothing worse than having a dictionary thats government controlled.
very sinister. Id like to know who applied to have it changed.
Submitted by Thanatos (user info) at 2004-03-08 01:37:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Kind of interesting. This brings up a question that has been bugging me, and figured I should bring it up here.
What it the definition of a word? Does the common-usage define it, or is the dictionary definition the real meaning of the word?
E.G. - the phrase three fold common usage(at least from most of the people I talk to) seem to imply that it means three times the previous value
In reality, three fold is defined to be 8 times the original value. Which is correct?
There are many other small curiousities of language, and I think I would become a fair linguist and historian if I had the desire to pursue them, but engineering is my calling.
Submitted by Confusion (user info) at 2004-03-07 17:07:25 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Okay...
Okay...
Okay?...
Okay.
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2004-03-07 16:50:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
thoughtful post well researched.
+2 for you.
Submitted by Biloba (user info) at 2004-03-07 16:24:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I sensed when I wrote this that it would only appeal to a limited number of people. It's not shocking or funny, and the only people that might appreciate it are those who are interested in how little differences are sometimes telling of something more significant.
I didn't go for the old "is a fag something you smoke or someone who smokes you?" line because I thought it was tired, played out, and so obvious it's boring by this point. But it probably would have gotten a better response. Unfortunetly, I'm often interested in things others think are boring, *shrug.
Biloba
Submitted by xtac <xtac818.at.aol.com> at 2004-03-07 16:08:24 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
This was the most boring piece of crap I've ever read. Couldn't you have come up with something at least slightly more interesting and slightly more informative? The general idea of this post had true potential but you ruined it. So -2 for you.
Submitted by lush (user info) at 2004-03-07 13:42:17 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
wow I still don't care
Submitted by K.M (user info) at 2004-03-07 13:21:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by drunken_pyro_boy (user info) at 2004-03-07 13:00:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
HOW DID YOU FIGURE
THAT ONE OUT?
Submitted by Falconer (user info) at 2004-03-07 09:23:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
interesting.
Submitted by blunt_captain (user info) at 2004-03-07 05:17:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
hey thats neat
Submitted by Falco (user info) at 2004-03-07 03:15:49 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Ass
Submitted by squattail (user info) at 2004-03-07 03:03:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
when was the last time you said sexism, communism or socialism?