From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC845138CD0 for ; Tue, 19 May 2015 23:09:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B1698E08EE; Tue, 19 May 2015 23:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01c.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01c.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.5]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 808E2E08E1 for ; Tue, 19 May 2015 23:09:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=wstn.localnet) by smarthost01c.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yuqdr-0002ht-Rk for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 19 May 2015 23:09:43 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: question for en_GB users of myspell-en dictionaries Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 00:09:43 +0100 Message-ID: <1803576.2VIbihVEJV@wstn> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (Linux/3.18.12-gentoo; KDE/4.14.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20150519174357.0ef88a21@sepulchrave.remarqs> References: <20150507150916.7312349c@sepulchrave.remarqs> <20150519174357.0ef88a21@sepulchrave.remarqs> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Originating-smarthost01c-IP: [82.69.80.10] X-Archives-Salt: 98c00fe7-abff-4c86-9862-a98f6c441b18 X-Archives-Hash: e361b8d110b58db73d0eadc0460bdda2 On Tuesday 19 May 2015 17:43:57 =BBQ=AB wrote: > The main difference between standard UK spelling and Oxford spelling = is > that Oxford spelling uses -ize endings (criticize, optimize) whereas > standard UK spelling uses -ise. Using Oxford will make most readers > think you're using American spelling, since Americans use -ize. Yes, and I've never understood that. The -ise version is true to its Fr= ench=20 origins (remember 1066?), while as far as I can see the -ize version ha= s no=20 precedent. It also doesn't help with knowing which ending to use in a=20= particular case, so I've no idea why they've adopted it. Moreover, Oxford English insists on that egregious comma before nearly = every=20 "and", which is just stupid. It causes as many problems as it avoids, a= nd it's=20 deadly to the flow of the sentence. I once argued about it with an Amer= ican=20 contributor to an e-mail list, and was told "it's a matter of style". N= o.=20 Wrong. It's just slavish obedience of an arbitrary rule which cannot be= =20 justified in any rational way. Just consider: "and" is equivalent to a = comma in=20 most cases; it's how a child starts out until it learns something more=20= sophisticated. So pairing the two leaves us with nonsense. Just my two penn'orth. --=20 Rgds Peter