American English Professor hates British English

[Red Right Hand]

"We don't use British grammar here."

I wasn't aware there was much of a difference except for a few extra words and a few different spellings?

There's some punctuation differences, too.

Such as?

He gave me a bit of a lecture on how quotations are used and how they relate to other punctuation. Apparently, Americans think it's right to always stick punctuation inside the quote, without exception. According to him, that's not always the case for British English.

Personally, I'd like both sides to be consistent. It's the same fucking language, for Christ's sake.

Spoiler: Webster's Third New International Dictionary excerpt

13.1 Direct quotations: "When I am dead," said one of the keenest minds, "lay a sword on my coffin."

13.2 In long quotations, left-hand marks are placed at the beginning of every paragraph, as well as at the end of the selection.

13.3 Quotation marks are usually not used when the quoted matter is set in smaller type or in paragraphs indented on both sides.

13.4 Single quotation marks enclose a quotation within a quotation. The witness said, "I heard him say, 'Don't be late'; then I heard the door close."

13.5 Quotation marks enclose titles of short poems, paintings, lectures, articles, and parts or chapters of books. (Titles of whole books, periodicals, and newspapers are usually italicized in context.)

13.5.1 In American usage printers usually place a period or comma inside closing quotation marks whether it belongs logically to the quoted matter or to the whole sentence or context.... But when a logical or exact distinction is desired in specialized work in which clarity is more important than usual (as in this dictionary), a period or comma can be placed outside quotation marks when it belongs not in the quoted matter but to a larger unit containing the quoted matter. The package is labeled "Handle with Care".

13.5.2 Only one other mark accompanies closing quotation marks, whether the quotation and the whole sentence or context call for the same mark or for different marks. We shouted, "Where do you think you're going?" Why did you bellow, "Get out of here!"

13.5.3 A colon or semicolon is usually placed outside of quotation marks. "Fame is proof that people are gullible"; with this quotation, he retired in silence.

13.5.4 A colon or semicolon is sometimes placed inside the quotation marks when it belongs inseparably to the quotation. However, a terminal colon or semicolon of quoted matter incorporated in a sentence usually gives place to appropriate end punctuation. "Sirs:" is a salutation....

13.5.5 A question mark or exclamation point is usually placed inside or outside the quotation marks according to whether it belongs to the quoted matter or to the whole sentence or clause that includes the quotation. Can you forget his angry exit after he shouted "Include me out"? "And what do you think of this new novel?" his friend asked.

13.6 Quotation marks, often single quotation marks, sometimes enclose technical terms unfamiliar to the reader; words used in an unusual sense; and coined word, trade or shop jargon, or slang for which the writer implies a slight apology. An "em" is a unit of measure used in printing. He is "goofy" according to their lingo. 'Strangeness' is a property of elementary particles.

Considering the Merriam-Webster is a US company, it would not surprise me to hear that your professor is taking shite about Americans always putting the punctuation inside of the quote.

OT: Your lecturer can go fuck himself if he objects to you using British English. If, however, he objects to you switching between the two then you hardly have a case against him, really.

 

[TiefBlau]

Well what the fuck sort of grammar does he use? English grammar is for the english language, end of story.

Of course there a differences in dialects, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still ENGLISH

Your teacher is a huge wanker.

If we speak in Mandarin Chinese, and someone decides to be a smartass and speak in Cantonese, I wouldn't accept it. Much less if he had the gall to mix the two together. DWI.

"We don't use British grammar here."

I wasn't aware there was much of a difference except for a few extra words and a few different spellings?

There's some punctuation differences, too.

Such as?

He gave me a bit of a lecture on how quotations are used and how they relate to other punctuation. Apparently, Americans think it's right to always stick punctuation inside the quote, without exception. According to him, that's not always the case for British English.

Personally, I'd like both sides to be consistent. It's the same fucking language, for Christ's sake.

Yes, I'd like it to be consistent as well. So there's really no point to mixing the two grammar structures together, now is there? You were pretty much asking for it by making it a pain in the ass to grade.

I *cannot* *STAND* the terms 'British English' and 'American English'. The Chinese language has about a million different dialects, and they all have different names. I think 'British English' should be called English (because it's the proper, ORIGINAL one), and that rubbish the Americans distorted it into should be called something else.

I love how people have a way of creating credibility and then completely undermining it.

"There are a million different dialects in the Chinese language. As for English, there's only one correct one, and the others are for shitheads."

And while we're on the subject, let's talk about the different Chinese dialects. When I speak Mandarin Chinese, I speak Mandarin Chinese. I don't sprinkle Cantonese in there because I feel like it needs that extra artistic flair or I want to be a smartass. And if I do, the professor has every right to say to himself, "I'm not going to waste my time adjusting your pain-in-the-ass Chinese when the standards for Chinese grammar conventions have been made abundantly clear."

 

[UnmotivatedSlacker]

You're being a baby, your teacher doesn't hate British English. He wants you to use American English because it's an AMERICAN ENGLISH CLASS, deal with it. And it doesn't help that you admitted that your writing is inconsistent, that would be annoying for anyone to read and it's a legit reason to get marked down for.

Also to you people complaining that British English is the original English, who the fuck cares, it's fucking irrelevant. He's in an American English course, that means he writes using American grammar. He can write in klingon for all I care when he's out of the course.

 

[carpathic]

"We don't use British grammar here."

I wasn't aware there was much of a difference except for a few extra words and a few different spellings?

There are a lot of "u"'s in british (and Canadian) english. For the record, Canadians just take the middle ground figuring that you can spell it either way typically. ie. colour or color. Grey or Gray.

 

[sheah1]

Personally I think the fact that there is American English is just ridiculous (I know that seems douchey but it's the english language so people should really use the english language) so this just makes my blood boil to a god-awful point. This is literally like me being prejudiced to Irish people (as I've got a teensy bit of Irish in me), don't be a dick about your own ancestry dickface (the teacher, I mean).

You do realize that there are almost as many differences between American English and British English as there are between British English and 17th Century British English right?[/quote]

Yeah I realise, my point is pretty damn silly I can see now, but the idea of american English bugs the hell out of me since the differences are so incredibly inconsequential that there doesn't seem to be any good reason for the difference.

 

[kurtzy23]

Just ignore him and keep using British English.

 

[UberNoodle]

I wish I were joking. I'm apparently beginning to blend some bits of American grammar with British grammar... and he hates it. I got a paper that I wrote back today with marks all over the damned thing with one large comment down at the bottom:

"We don't use British grammar here."

It's strange. You'd think that the English... know a thing or two about the English language.

Any other Escapists have experiences like this?

I teach English to speakers of other languages and there are two .. no three, types of English teachers. Type 3 is the "I just use it" type. They wouldn't know a verb from a indefinate article but that's A-OK for them. Type 2 is the "my English is sacred" type. These teachers are like your professor, and other variations on the language scare them. They rally against accents, argue on pronunciations and are generally competitive about their own "true" brand of English.

Type 1 is the "Language is community property" type. That's me. While I do value good use of the language (vocab, grammar, composition, etc), I realise (as your college professor should realise) that living languages change constantly, and that by placing oneself as a gatekeeper on that change, the natural process of evolution is hampered. The difference between American and British English is simply time, distance and culture.

Whereever English has gone, whoever it has met, it has imported and reappropriated. It has one of the largest vocabularies of any language spoken today because it is like a sponge, sucking up word after word from other languages, cultures and sub-cultures. So what then, really is American English and British English when humanity is no longer limited by geography and local communication? Even in the USA itself, English differs drastically across the landmass.

Many of the phrases and words that are now seen as "American" (these are from before the conscious effort to reform the language) were once "British". They were in line with English back in Britain but due to the difficulty in communicating with the colonies in the Americas, many changes in England never reached those colonies. British English unwent some upheavals and reforms as well and the burgeoning "American" interpretation of it fell out of synch. The same happened in Australia.

My point is, British, American, Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, etc, English are not different languages. They can place no claim of superiority or power over how the language is to be spoken. Eventually, as humanity heads towards its globalised future, the differences between each of these types of English will become fuzzier. Any PROFESSOR that takes such a hardline stance as yours has, is really missing the forest for the trees. English has never been static, it has always changed and imported. The only way to enshrine a language in standards is to stop using it.

 

[Lancer723]

"We don't use British grammar here."

I wasn't aware there was much of a difference except for a few extra words and a few different spellings?

There's some punctuation differences, too.

Such as?

When using quotations.

American: "This is how quotes are used."

English/British: "This is how quotes are used".

The two grammar schemes have some minor idiosyncrasies like this, probably what the professor is referring to.

For the record all you brits raising hell, it's not like your language is some sort of master grammar scheme handed down by the gods which is sacrosanct. English is originally a mixing of Anglo and Germanic dialects as well as as smattering of other languages. Considering that both British and American grammar has changed over the last 250 years ago, it's not really that British English is "better". Languages are constantly evolving and changing based on region and other influences. Look at the Spanish language, which has tons and tons of dialects, even in Spain there are multiple dialects across the country. Hell the Chinese are split into to different languages, Mandarin and Cantonese.

Get off your high horses people, America has it's own grammar scheme and it's only natural that American students be held to it. Besides, its not like its a problem that comes up alot, the two grammar schemes are built the same, the differences are relatively minor to begin with.

 

[Giest4life]

Yea, for my English essays I used to use footnotes for citations. I got a paper littered with red ink because of that. Seemingly, footnotes are used only by dead people or the English.

 

[Caiti Voltaire]

Different dialects of a language, are not separate languages.

 

[internetzealot1]

Your professor does have a point. America doesn't use British English. If you are writing a formal paper in America, then you use what's correct in America. Its that simple.

 

[nifedj]

I wouldn't worry to much about using a variation of the language unusual to you if it's for university.

It's funny that a lot of people can get up in arms about American English when so many Brits make lots of grammatical errors, not just as slips of the tongue but because they don't know better (I'm Scottish). Being able to speak a variation of the language properly is far more important than which variation you speak.

 

[InnerRebellion]

I use British English as well, specifically with words like colour, favourite, and the like. My teachers have learned to put up with it.

Wow, you have some bad teachers (or just really lazy ones) if they let you (the student) decide what grammar is appropriate.

Actually, here where I live, most of my English teachers also use British grammar. It is almost a social norm for English students here to use British grammar instead of American grammar.

 

[Caligulove]

Well he does have a curriculum that he teaches, and there are grammar rules that vary between native English and American English. You teach a language, and so you correct in the grammar and the style that you're teaching. You dress up your language when writing properly in a class, the same way that you dress yourself physically for occasions. Learn from it and move on.

A teacher in Mexico would be right to correct Spaniard grammar in a Mexican student's paper, for example.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

CRUMPETSSCONESANDEARRRRRLGREY!

I didn't know there was punctuation differences, but they're essentially the same language. Theoretically it should even be okay to use pan-english but I'd not advise it.

I was worried you meant you misused the apostrophe. That would have RILEDMYCORGIES D:

 

[spookydom]

He hates our language Yet has to teach and speak it every day. Karma enough I think you knuckledraging low brow prick.

 

[Braonan]

Poe, Twain, Hemingway they all used the proper king's/queen's English.

 

[internetzealot1]

Your in America being taught by an American English teacher.

So why would you use British grammar. Maybe if you're with friends or in Britain, but not in a academic paper!
Yes it sounded wrong, but your supposed to use proper grammar.

One could argue the OP *IS* using proper grammar. Also, while we're arguing grammar, it's 'you're', not 'your'. Maybe you shouldn't be posting on this thread


I *cannot* *STAND* the terms 'British English' and 'American English'. The Chinese language has about a million different dialects, and they all have different names. I think 'British English' should be called English (because it's the proper, ORIGINAL one), and that rubbish the Americans distorted it into should be called something else. As for your professor, as long as it is considered correct in 'British English', he shouldn't have marked you down, but morons will be morons

Good God, get off you're high horse. You don't mean to tell me that British English hasn't changed in the 200 years since America won its independednce? And that a teacher of American English should teach British English to his students? And its not even like there is any big difference between the two. I know the U.K. fiercely bitter over America, but all you Brits in here who are acting like this teacher should be burned at the stake for doing his job correctly are making complete fools of yourselves.

 

[UberNoodle]

"We don't use British grammar here."

I wasn't aware there was much of a difference except for a few extra words and a few different spellings?

There's some punctuation differences, too.

Such as?

When using quotations.

American: "This is how quotes are used."

English/British: "This is how quotes are used".

The two grammar schemes have some minor idiosyncrasies like this, probably what the professor is referring to.

For the record all you brits raising hell, it's not like your language is some sort of master grammar scheme handed down by the gods which is sacrosanct. English is originally a mixing of Anglo and Germanic dialects as well as as smattering of other languages. Considering that both British and American grammar has changed over the last 250 years ago, it's not really that British English is "better". Languages are constantly evolving and changing based on region and other influences. Look at the Spanish language, which has tons and tons of dialects, even in Spain there are multiple dialects across the country. Hell the Chinese are split into to different languages, Mandarin and Cantonese.

Get off your high horses people, America has it's own grammar scheme and it's only natural that American students be held to it. Besides, its not like its a problem that comes up alot, the two grammar schemes are built the same, the differences are relatively minor to begin with.

Sure, you are exactly right on your main points there, but the problem with the "grammar debate" today is that most people are confused. For example, the placement of a fullstop inside or after a quotation mark is a punctuation issue and not a grammar one. It also is related to the intricacies of type setting. See the quote below. Grammar is the arrangement and relationship between words in a sentence. Many people muddy the water significantly when they confuse punctuation with grammar and also STYLE GUIDES with grammar. The latter case is particularly troublesome because style guides are often arbitrary and dependant on a particular person or organisation's idea of what LOOKS good or is easier to read. Some maxims in English are also outdated or non-sensical, such as never end a sentence with a preposition. Winston Churchil nailed this perfectly when he responded to a writer who criticised him for such an "error".

"Ending a sentence with a preposition? That is something up with which we shall not put!"

Anyway, in regards to the placement of a fullstop, it would depend on how and why your quotation marks are used. When it comes to English there is rarely a "one rule to rule them all".

The traditional convention in American English and in Canada is "aesthetic" punctuation, or "typesetters' quotation", where full stops and commas are included inside quotation marks even if they are not part of the quoted sentence. The style used in the UK, and to a less extent in the U.S., is so-called "logical punctuation", which stays true to the punctuation used by the original source, placing commas and full stops inside or outside quotation marks depending on where they were placed in the material that is being quoted. Scientific and technical publications, including in the U.S., almost universally use it for that reason.[citation needed]

The aesthetic or typesetter's rule was standard in early 19th-century Britain; it was advocated, for example, in the influential book, The King's English, by Fowler and Fowler.

"Carefree" means "free from care or anxiety." (aesthetic or typesetters' style)
"Carefree" means "free from care or anxiety". (logical style used here because the full stop was not part of the original quotation)

Before the advent of mechanical type, the order of quotation marks with full stops and commas was not given much consideration. The printing press required that the easily damaged smallest pieces of type for the comma and full stop be protected behind the more robust quotation marks.[5] Typesetters' style still adheres to this older tradition in formal writing. It is taught to American schoolchildren when they learn how to draft prose, and is strictly observed in most books, newspapers, magazines, and journals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_stop#Punctuation_styles_when_quoting

I also found this to be interesting and self affirming as well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark