It did not all happen quite like that. A few key points about the origin of differences between British and American English spelling:
1) Not all spellings were due to American changes!
a) When colonization began in the 17th century, spelling was more fluid. In a number of cases, BOTH the later "American" and "British" spellings were in use.
b) In some cases of vocabulary (and I think perhaps also in spelling) the AMERICAN word/form was the more common English one of the 17th century and the British version changed while the American one did not.
c) Certain spelling conventions differ because of later BRITISH changes. For example, the choice of "-ise" rather than "-ize" (the latter is closer to the Greek ending from which this suffix comes). Actually, many British scholars have advocated "ize" as well!
2) For distinctive American spellings (which did NOT exist in earlier English) -- Much is often credited to the spelling reforms suggested by Noah Webster, and included in his publications in the early 19th century.
Webster, for instance, gained acceptance for the dropping of the "u" in "colour", "honour". Some say he did so just to differentiate American English from the British. But this is a misunderstanding. Webster DID appeal to national pride in advocating his "republican" approach to decisions about spelling, etc., contrasting it this with how such decisions were determined by the elite/aristocracy in Britain.
But the argument was not simply political; it was logical. (The "u" for instance, is a change due to the Latin words coming to English through French; they serve no particular purpose in the English language.) Note that Webster was an educator of children and wanted such changes for practical reasons.
As a matter of fact, he was correct about British conventions being established more by the aristocracy than the public or even by educators and scholars. Indeed there were many British scholars of the late 18th to early 19th century who advocated the same sort of changes, but did not have the (political) power to effect such reforms.
2006-09-01 09:26:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by bruhaha 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Spelling gradually evolves over time. The English did not immediately begin using different spelling upon landing in America. Actually, spelling did not have set standards in colonial time, hence the odd spelling in old texts. Only after schools began adapting spellers did English spellings become standarized. During Theodore Roosevelt's administration, Roosevelt wanted to simplify spelling. He tried to mandate a simplified spelling structure in official documents, but this movement failed. However, Americans did begin to spell "colour" "color" and "theatre" "theater" and etc. There is a revived movement to simplify spelling into a purely phonetic system. However, many people argue that it will make vocabulary more difficult to understand since the phonetic system will lose the meanings of Latin roots.
2006-08-30 11:59:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by ethereality 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A lot of these answers are far too specific. If you actually think about it, these weren't changed the instant people came to America. The language slowly evolved as people spoke. Noah Webster may have changed the exact spelling, but the people were the real ones behind the change.
2006-08-30 11:58:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by j0be 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
To make the words more American. They were trying to abolish as much of the "English" influence on their lives as they could.
Plus I just read some President was a bad speller and changed the spelling of some words like colour to color.
2006-08-30 12:39:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by daljack -a girl 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Noah Webster wrote an American dictionary, in which he tried to eliminate some of the superfluous letters in English spelling, and, at the same time, craft more of a truly American (as opposed to British colonial) identity. His dictionary and spelling books form the foundation of American usage to this day.
2006-08-30 11:57:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Steve H 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The spellings of words are always evolving - nothing unique about coming to America...although the separation between continents I'm sure increased the pace of change.
2006-08-30 12:00:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Funnily adequate, American English is unquestionably extra helpful English than our very own version. while the British colonised united statesa. in around the sixteenth Century, they took Shakespearean English with them. All languages are prompted by ability of alternative languages, yet united statesa. is farther from different international places (those in Europe, Asia and Africa) than England, so the yank dialect actually differed below the British version. as a result, as unusual because it sort of feels, the individuals communicate extra helpful English than us! We further the U unnecessarily, by ability of how. It got here from Europe.
2016-11-06 02:37:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because some loon wanted to rid the English language of all French influence, and get back to a "purer" English. So any spelling that smacked of French was "anglicised."
Seems Yanks have always hated the French.
2006-08-30 11:59:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Aphrodite Jones 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Languages all change with time. If you were to try to read something in English which had been written, say 500 years ago, it would make no sense and bear very very little resembelance to modern English!
2006-08-30 12:40:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think they got lazy, think, I have no proof.
Dropping U's saves time.
Anti-Britannia, right oh! Now we know.
The Yankees the North, in the War of Independence, wanted 2 abolish slavery & the Brit Upper-class, did not, so I'd have rebel against that 2!
It's the changing S's 4 Z's, that sometimes confuses me.
2006-08-30 11:58:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋