Prev: New mid-week ambiguious jokes and if you don't like them, fuckoff
Next: No helmet legal for Unicycle rider?
From: Boxer on 18 Jan 2008 21:56 "Theo Bekkers" <tbekkers(a)bekkers.com.au> wrote in message news:4791652a$1(a)news.bekkers.com.au... > Boxer wrote: >> Johno wrote > >>> The botom line is we are is in Australia and we shoold use our way of >>> speling werds as they is spleet. So there! :P > >> So you are advocating for freedom to wear what you like to a pub, but >> draw the line on freedom in the way words are spelt? > > You have to draw the line in the sand somewhere. > > Beer mate? > > Theo > Being of Irish herritage, I really don't adhear to the "English" way of doing things. Boxer
From: Damien on 18 Jan 2008 23:34 Johno wrote: > No Boxer, all I have stated is what is considered the correct way to > spell a word in AUST. I am not saying it is the only to spell any > word. So an Australian person, working for an Australian company, located in Australia, must always use Australian spellings - even if they happen to be writing for an exclusively American audience??? Being in Australia is not sufficient reason to demand that "Australian" spellings are used exclusively. The real problem here is not the form of spelling used, but the unapologetic cultural bigotry of those who are making the loudest objections.
From: Theo Bekkers on 19 Jan 2008 00:53 Damien wrote: > Johno wrote: >> No Boxer, all I have stated is what is considered the correct way to >> spell a word in AUST. I am not saying it is the only to spell any >> word. > So an Australian person, working for an Australian company, located in > Australia, must always use Australian spellings - even if they happen > to be writing for an exclusively American audience??? I would expect an Australian to use Australian spelling and an American to use US spellings, even in discourse with each other. I doubt that an American would be offended by an aussie using the word colour or vice versa with color. But for an Aussie to use the word color is just wrong to me. Even 'Labor' makes me cringe. > Being in Australia is not sufficient reason to demand that > "Australian" spellings are used exclusively. The real problem here is > not the form of spelling used, but the unapologetic cultural bigotry > of those who are making the loudest objections. I think you're wrong about that cultural bigotry part. People resist language change, no matter where they live, and that is not bigotry or a bad thing. The Americans are horrified what 'hoodspeak' is doing to their language. Word like 'mon' and 'ho' are terrible use of language. You want to know what an undefended language sounds like? Watch Jerry Springer some time. Theo
From: Boxer on 19 Jan 2008 01:05 "Theo Bekkers" <tbekkers(a)bekkers.com.au> wrote in message news:47919138$1(a)news.bekkers.com.au... > > I would expect an Australian to use Australian spelling and an American to > use US spellings, even in discourse with each other. I doubt that an > American would be offended by an aussie using the word colour or vice > versa with color. But for an Aussie to use the word color is just wrong to > me. Even 'Labor' makes me cringe. > > Theo I agree Labor has made me cringe for ages. Boxer
From: Damien on 19 Jan 2008 01:06
Theo Bekkers wrote: > I would expect an Australian to use Australian spelling and an American to > use US spellings, even in discourse with each other. I doubt that an > American would be offended by an aussie using the word colour or vice versa > with color. But for an Aussie to use the word color is just wrong to me. > Even 'Labor' makes me cringe. So if the Australian in question was a journalist writing for an American newspaper, but based out of their home/office here, then you'd still expect them to use Australian spellings? > I think you're wrong about that cultural bigotry part. People resist I think I'm spot-on. Not one single person has opposed "American" spellings by providing specific and non-cultural evidence of the superiority of "Australian" spellings. Not even once. In every single instance, their demands have been exclusively on the grounds that Australian spellings should be used because we're Australian and American spellings should be rejected because they're American. That says it's all about culture, nothing else, and anyone who makes their demands on that basis alone is a bigot. > language change, no matter where they live, and that is not bigotry or a bad > thing. The Americans are horrified what 'hoodspeak' is doing to their > language. Word like 'mon' and 'ho' are terrible use of language. You want to > know what an undefended language sounds like? Watch Jerry Springer some > time. And now you're talking about something completely different altogether. The various "street" variants of language are corruptions, they are not officially recognised as being correct and accceptable in formal contexts due to their informal nature. Was it intentional that you neglected to also refer to similar Australian corruptions, such as strine etc? |