Speech pattern and typographical variations across Canada

[Doug]

Originally Posted by lio45

Not if it's written like that in a British article destined to an audience of Brits.

Not anymore than you can fault a French article for misspelling London as "Londres".

I don't get the hangup over spelling standards. I'm from a place and time where Canadian English didn't exist. Up until junior high, British and American spellings were taught as acceptible alternatives that could be mixed. Both were common in the public sphere. For example, "Centre Street' was a few blocks east of Calgary's" Chinook Center" mall. Around the mid 80's, American spellings became shameful for some reason. Canadian newspapers standardised around the same time.

Academics and Canadian cultural protectionist seem to have the greatest hangups over Canadian spelling. When I defended my MSc thesis, one member of the committee (coincidentally an outspoken environmentist, anti-American and leftist) tried to block me for using American spelling. I refused to compromise and appealed on the grounds my thesis was published by an American journal to an international audience. If my spelling was good enough to be published, why should I suffer so some out of touch professor can rage against the machine? I won the appeal but was docked marks.

U or A probably considered me a trouble maker as I also refused to pay student union fees on the grounds that no one can force me to support a union. I also complained about a Finance professor who told our class that we were getting a substandard education because Ralph Klein exempted energy companies from paying taxes.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Perhaps my use of proper names is not the best example.

Pearl Harbor the proper name doesn't have a different spelling in English regardless of where you are.

So an article about it in the Times of London would say "The harbour at Pearl Harbor is very deep."

An article in the New York Times would say "The harbor at Pearl Harbor is very deep."

"Pearl Harbour" in Hong Kong is still "Pearl Harbour" when referenced by an American publication.

The same reasoning applies to names and brands. Forcing someone to change the spelling or translate their name is offensive. Obviously there are exceptional circumstances where a name or brand has a ridiculous interpretation in certain locales or cultures, or someone does so voluntarily. Why does the Quebec government, for example, pressure chain stores to translate their names (ex. Maison Costco, Cafe Starbucks)?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Doug

"Pearl Harbour" in Hong Kong is still "Pearl Harbour" when referenced by an American publication.

The same reasoning applies to names and brands. Forcing someone to change the spelling or translate their name is offensive. Obviously there are exceptional circumstances where a name or brand has a ridiculous interpretation in certain locales or cultures, or someone does so voluntarily. Why does the Quebec government, for example, pressure chain stores to translate their names (ex. Maison Costco, Cafe Starbucks)?

The signs outside Costcos in Quebec all say "COSTCO WHOLESALE":

https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8405644,...ro3JFyzmNcn2z-djmxMBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I believe Starbucks says CAFÉ STARBUCKS but not sure if that's a corporate choice or government imposition. Probably the former as Payless Shoe Source is still Payless Shoe Source here.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

No, favorite and honorable are correct.

Not in Atlantic Canada they're not........

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Not in Atlantic Canada they're not........

As official as it gets:

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/Justin-Trudeau(58733)

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Canadian English spelling requires the U, though.

Originally Posted by Doug

I don't get the hangup over spelling standards. I'm from a place and time where Canadian English didn't exist. Up until junior high, British and American spellings were taught as acceptible alternatives that could be mixed. Both were common in the public sphere. For example, "Centre Street' was a few blocks east of Calgary's" Chinook Center" mall. Around the mid 80's, American spellings became shameful for some reason. Canadian newspapers standardised around the same time.

I'm with Doug. Is there even such a thing as 'official' Canadian English- if so it's news to me. I also grew up in the time where British and American spelling were equally used. In school my teachers said they didn't care which one we used as long as we were consistent. I've used American spelling ever since, it just seems more logical to me.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lubicon

I'm with Doug. Is there even such a thing as 'official' Canadian English- if so it's news to me. I also grew up in the time where British and American spelling were equally used. In school my teachers said they didn't care which one we used as long as we were consistent. I've used American spelling ever since, it just seems more logical to me.

I know you Prairie boys have Cole Porter's "Don't Fence Me In" as a mantra , but languages are fundamentally constructed codes and conventions. It follows that there will be rules to follow, and in a professional setting, having stuff spelled all sorts of different ways just looks messy and, yeah, unprofessional.

Besides, most places in the world don't have trouble following their country's spelling conventions for their languages. No one in the U.S. laments not having the freedom to use a U in colour, and Brits don't complain about not being able to leave it out.

It's very simple - they know how to write their language properly based on the norms of the country they live in.

(And BTW, before someone goes there, there is no *Bonus Diversity Enrichment* that comes from X% of Canadians writing colour with a U and X% writing it without one.)

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I know you Prairie boys have Cole Porter's "Don't Fence Me In" as a mantra , but languages are fundamentally constructed codes and conventions. It follows that there will be rules to follow, and in a professional setting, having stuff spelled all sorts of different ways just looks messy and, yeah, unprofessional.

Besides, most places in the world don't have trouble following their country's spelling conventions for their languages. No one in the U.S. laments not having the freedom to use a U in colour, and Brits don't complain about not being able to leave it out.

It's very simple - they know how to write their language properly based on the norms of the country they live in.

(And BTW, before someone goes there, there is no *Bonus Diversity Enrichment* that comes from X% of Canadians writing colour with a U and X% writing it without one.)

English has 2 standards: US and International (aka British). Why is Canada so special that it needed to invent another variant in the 70's/80's that would never be used outside its borders? Probably another lame form of protectionism that serves noboby's interests beyond that of the federal government trying to overstate its value.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Doug

English has 2 standards: US and International (aka British). Why is Canada so special that it needed to invent another variant in the 70's/80's that would never be used outside its borders? Probably another lame form of protectionism that serves noboby's interests beyond that of the federal government trying to overstate its value.

I honestly have no idea why it exists, though I do know that it probably goes back further than the 70s/80s, and that it's very unlikely to be the result of a federal government conspiracy.

But I also know that francophone Switzerland (2 million people) and francophone Belgium (4 million people) have their own linguistic quirks that basically evaporate at the border with France (60 million people).

It seems to me that being your own country generally involves doing your own thing for a bunch of stuff, doesn't it? (And sometimes freely choosing to go with the flow with neighbours or allies.) Otherwise, what's the point?

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

No, favorite and honorable are correct.

No, they are not correct in the Canadian context. Why do some Canadians insist on defending improper spelling within our own country?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Pinus

No, they are not correct in the Canadian context. Why do some Canadians insist on defending improper spelling within our own country?

Spelling it colour or color or centre or center is a cultural enrichment, and also a form of freedom. Kinda like riding a horse or a motorcycle with the wind blowing through your hair.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Spelling it colour or color or centre or center is a cultural enrichment, and also a form of freedom. Kinda like riding a horse or a motorcycle with the wind blowing through your hair.

Or the freedom to ride a motorcycle with the wind blowing on your turban :p

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Or the freedom to ride a motorcycle with the wind blowing on your turban :p

I'm soooooooo "20th century", what can I say?

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It seems to me that being your own country generally involves doing your own thing for a bunch of stuff, doesn't it? (And sometimes freely choosing to go with the flow with neighbours or allies.) Otherwise, what's the point?

Distinctiveness for the sake of distinctiveness is a waste of time. What value is in inventing a new English variant? Is Canadian English somehow more descriptive or is it simply a failed attempt to assert cultural distinction in a world where that is becoming difficult and irrelevant?

If I remember correctly some Laurentian publisher got a huge government grant during the Trudeau 1.0 era to provide Dictionaries of Canadian English to every school. It was slow to catch on but by around the mid 80's, teachers and especially so called cultural leaders really pushed it. I was already in my early teens by then so it was too late. Curiously, both of my parents were educated in SK and AB in the 50's and 60's and always used 100 % American spellings and pronounciations. Hearing "schedule" with a soft "c" or "initiate" as "in-is-see-ate" still sounds grating as I doubt I heard either with a non British accent until I went to Western University in my teens.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Doug

Distinctiveness for the sake of distinctiveness is a waste of time. What value is in inventing a new English variant? Is Canadian English somehow more descriptive or is it simply a failed attempt to assert cultural distinction in a world where that is becoming difficult and irrelevant?

If I remember correctly some Laurentian publisher got a huge government grant during the Trudeau 1.0 era to provide Dictionaries of Canadian English to every school. It was slow to catch on but by around the mid 80's, teachers and especially so called cultural leaders really pushed it. I was already in my early teens by then so it was too late. Curiously, both of my parents were educated in SK and AB in the 50's and 60's and always used 100 % American spellings and pronounciations. Hearing "schedule" with a soft "c" or "initiate" as "in-is-see-ate" still sounds grating as I doubt I heard either with a non British accent until I went to Western University in my teens.

I honestly don't really care that much. Just pointing out how the world generally works, and that it's not a hugely onerous unreasonable thing.

But if you were to come work for me (and I know you never will), I'd still expect you to follow the "code".

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Doug

If I remember correctly some Laurentian publisher got a huge government grant during the Trudeau 1.0 era to provide Dictionaries of Canadian English to every school. .

BTW, what's a "Laurentian" publisher?

Is it the same company that makes those coloured (colored?) pencils?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I honestly don't really care that much. Just pointing out how the world generally works, and that it's not a hugely onerous unreasonable thing.

But if you were to come work for me (and I know you never will), I'd still expect you to follow the "code".

"Code"? I think you mean your rules.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

"Code"? I think you mean your rules.

Just because you aren't aware of something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

https://www.thecanadianpress.com/writing-guides/the-canadian-press-stylebook/

Watching a bit less American TV can be good for you! You should try it sometime.

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

"Code"? I think you mean your rules.

No, he is referring to how proper spelling works in Canada. We don't live in the USofA. If you insist on being purposefully ignorant to Canadian culture and adore the American way of doing things so much, I would suggest you consider a move south of the border. They would love you wwaaayyy down yonder y'all.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by Doug

English has 2 standards: US and International (aka British). Why is Canada so special that it needed to invent another variant in the 70's/80's that would never be used outside its borders? Probably another lame form of protectionism that serves noboby's interests beyond that of the federal government trying to overstate its value.

Honestly, Doug...is this all an act? Never have I seen someone (on an internet forum or social media) display such obvious grounding in and adoration of Atlas Shrugged. Virtually every post you make essentially appears to be an extended commentary on the central tenet of your philosophy, summed up so neatly by Thatcher: "And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families."

Seems to me that Canadian English evolved slightly differently than American English did, though both variations were indeed at times either preserved or changed by diktat by various figures of cultural authority. Still, the idea that our unique spelling conventions are a government plot is, uh, a bit wacky. Even for you.