As so many discussions of "British vs. American English" this debate tends to be driven by incorrect historical information (often just assumptions).
1) The pronunciation "zee" was NOT an "American invention". It was part of a 17th dialect brought over by English colonists; the form later died out in England. This pronunciation may be found in a British school book of the time -- Lye’s New Spelling Book (1677).
(There were, in fact, other dialectal names for the letter, including "zad", "zard", "ezod", "izod, "izzard" and "uzzard".)
2) There's a rather simple, logical reason for the pronunciation "zee". This pattern focuses on the SOUND the letter represents, which is precisely what MOST of the English alphabet was already doing by this point (just buzz through them... nearly all do this!). In fact, in light of this, "zee" is rather unsurprising. What is much more interesting is how English ended up with a "zed".
The explanation for that: "z" did not adopt the pattern (and become "zee") along with other letters for the simple historical reason that the letter was a LATE-comer to English -- which is why it is at the END of the alphabet. It was introduced, with the name "zed", from Middle French, but ultimately goes back through Latin to Greek "zeta".
(This sort of name is quite common for the Greek alphabet which, WITH many of its names, was based on the Phoenician -- "alpha" is for the Semitic "aleph", "beta" for "beth", etc. The names of letters in Phoenician, Hebrew, etc., used WORDS beginning with the sounds, rather than just the sound. "Zeta" then --along with beta, eta, theta-- echoes some Semitic letter names, such as beth and tet.)
3) Though pt #1 should already make this clear, Noah Webster did not "decree" the pronunciation "zee". Though his work was quite influential, the vast majority of his suggestions were NOT adopted (and he later backed away from many). The spelling choices and changes he supported that succeeded (many of which others had argued for before him) -- as well as the pronunciation "zee"-- were generally accepted because they had more general support and seemed to people to make SENSE.
4) The REASON for Webster and others preferring "zee", as well as certain spelling variations (some new, some old) was NOT "simply to be different" from the British. Webster was a teacher and wanted to make changes that 'made sense' for the children being taught.
It is true that Webster argued in part on the basis of the superiority of a "republican" approach (thus preferring American to British), but from there he argued more that we ought not simply to do spell something a particular way because some social ELITE (British aristocracy in this case) has so decreed. (Do note that a number of the spelling reforms Webster advocated had supporters in Britain as well; they were simply less successful in carrying it out!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelling_differences
2006-07-16 14:41:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by bruhaha 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
The Romans took the letter from Greek 'zeta' quite late (which is why it's the last letter of our alphabet) and kept the name. Over time, the name 'zeta' shortened a little bit, to alternately 'zède' or 'zé' in France. Both of our English names seem to come from the two French 'short-forms' for 'zeta'.
'Zed' probably might have won the battle - it had become standard in the UK and the south of the USA - if, like so much in American English, it weren't for Noah Webster. He was trying to create an 'American language' and so, whenever there were two different forms of a word, he tended to use the one whic _wasn't_ preferred in the UK. So, while some Americans says zed and some said zee, in his dictionary he accepted no dispute and insisted on 'zee' as the _only_ acceptable pronunciation.
I say zed, as a Canadian, but to give credit where it's due, at least 'zee' makes the alphabet song rhyme!
2006-07-16 04:22:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by XYZ 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Correct English is the Mother English and is spoken only the English (as in England). All other forms of English realistically are dialects. American English is a dialect. It is just they way they say things.
It is kind of like German is spoken by Germany. But the Swiss speak a German dialect.
Different countries add their own influences into different things to suit them better
2006-07-16 05:03:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Zee is eezier to spell? The answer lies in American history, and in the desire of (former) colonists to break ties with the 'old country.' Similarly, Ben Franklin's dictionary modifications of spelling were meant to Americanize English as well as to phonetically simplify it.
2006-07-16 04:17:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by not the real me 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Americans pronounce it as it is said in words. Other countries simply follow the antiquated British system.
2006-07-16 04:55:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Cameron 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The next time you see an American ask him/her to stick out his tongue. Then ask someone from one of those other countries you mentioned to do the same. When you notice the American tongue, you will find your answer.
2006-07-16 04:13:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ricky 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
u're right.. i wonder also. because in Dutch the 'Z' is pronounced as a ZEd also..
2006-07-16 07:03:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by latina_girl 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
we don't call it /zed/ from where i come from and i'm not from the US
2006-07-16 04:14:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by krimy_kri 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Funkeywinkerbean!!Why is stop,stop in english and halt in german?
2006-07-16 04:12:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Were kool and they are most definitely not dude.
2006-07-16 05:05:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by Shag 2
·
0⤊
0⤋