-ise vs -ize

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Bristollad
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:39 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Bristollad » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:45 pm

The use of -ize in British English is referred to as “Oxford Spelling” and claims to be more etymologically correct. It is regarded as an affectation that is used by the “properly educated” by many people (whereas the American tendency to add -ize etc. to everything is seen as just wrong e.g. burglarize hence burglarizer instead of burgle and burglar). Strangely enough according to Wikipedia, Oxford University recommends using -ise for its public relations material because it is more accepted by the public.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28051
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Malcolm » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:39 pm

Bristollad wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:45 pm
The use of -ize in British English is referred to as “Oxford Spelling” and claims to be more etymologically correct. It is regarded as an affectation that is used by the “properly educated” by many people (whereas the American tendency to add -ize etc. to everything is seen as just wrong e.g. burglarize hence burglarizer instead of burgle and burglar). Strangely enough according to Wikipedia, Oxford University recommends using -ise for its public relations material because it is more accepted by the public.
Read anything from the 17th century...spelling is merely a convention
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1549
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Mantrik » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:57 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:39 pm
Bristollad wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:45 pm
The use of -ize in British English is referred to as “Oxford Spelling” and claims to be more etymologically correct. It is regarded as an affectation that is used by the “properly educated” by many people (whereas the American tendency to add -ize etc. to everything is seen as just wrong e.g. burglarize hence burglarizer instead of burgle and burglar). Strangely enough according to Wikipedia, Oxford University recommends using -ise for its public relations material because it is more accepted by the public.
Read anything from the 17th century...spelling is merely a convention

Go back a couple more centuries and the language of England was then apparently closest to modern day............American English! The rhotic pronunciation taken to American took root there and changed far less than in England over the centuries. Spelling conventions are, as you say, just whatever was commonly agreed, for example when printing really took off.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

Simon E.
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Simon E. » Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:02 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:39 pm
Bristollad wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:45 pm
The use of -ize in British English is referred to as “Oxford Spelling” and claims to be more etymologically correct. It is regarded as an affectation that is used by the “properly educated” by many people (whereas the American tendency to add -ize etc. to everything is seen as just wrong e.g. burglarize hence burglarizer instead of burgle and burglar). Strangely enough according to Wikipedia, Oxford University recommends using -ise for its public relations material because it is more accepted by the public.
Read anything from the 17th century...spelling is merely a convention
Indeed. And was not standardised in English English until relatively recently. There are for example, at least four authenticated different spellings of Shakespeare's name..in his own hand!

Which is one reason I couldn't be bothered to engage with MiphamFan et al on the subject.
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

Bristollad
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:39 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Bristollad » Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:22 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:39 pm
Read anything from the 17th century...spelling is merely a convention
Very true - and the spelling we've been lumbered with due to the tyranny of the dictionaries doesn't reflect modern pronunciation a lot of the time. But I have a liking for English spelling foibles nevertheless :smile:

From what I've read actually both burgle and burglarize are back formations from burglar, from around the second half of the 19th century.

MiphamFan
Posts: 933
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:46 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by MiphamFan » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:41 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:57 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:39 pm
Bristollad wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:45 pm
The use of -ize in British English is referred to as “Oxford Spelling” and claims to be more etymologically correct. It is regarded as an affectation that is used by the “properly educated” by many people (whereas the American tendency to add -ize etc. to everything is seen as just wrong e.g. burglarize hence burglarizer instead of burgle and burglar). Strangely enough according to Wikipedia, Oxford University recommends using -ise for its public relations material because it is more accepted by the public.
Read anything from the 17th century...spelling is merely a convention

Go back a couple more centuries and the language of England was then apparently closest to modern day............American English! The rhotic pronunciation taken to American took root there and changed far less than in England over the centuries. Spelling conventions are, as you say, just whatever was commonly agreed, for example when printing really took off.
Not really, American English prosody at least developed on its on path, quite different from England.

Like Darwin's finches, all languages change over the centuries, all are innovative in different ways and conservative in others: American English did conserve rhoticity but in General American they merged the vowel in the father and bother and now pronounce God as GAHD -- I find it very jarring in ESL learners who pronounce words like that.

I think "General American", i.e. a standardized dialect based on mid-Western English, was influenced a lot of by German prosody. For example when Brits ask questions the prosody is like the Latin-Italian penultimate stress pattern while Americans just raise the tone on the final syllable. I think West Country accents probably preserve both rhoticity as well as the older prosody -- IIRC, most early American colonists from England were from around there.

Simon E.
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Simon E. » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:50 pm

I still don't care. I was taught to use the 's' form. As were my parents. as are my chidren and their children and every Brit I know.
Someday that might change or revert or whatever. And I won't care.
I'll do what the prevailing norm is, because it the wider scheme of things it doesn't matter.
Last edited by Simon E. on Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9259
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by DGA » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:42 am

Mantrik wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:57 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:39 pm
Bristollad wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:45 pm
The use of -ize in British English is referred to as “Oxford Spelling” and claims to be more etymologically correct. It is regarded as an affectation that is used by the “properly educated” by many people (whereas the American tendency to add -ize etc. to everything is seen as just wrong e.g. burglarize hence burglarizer instead of burgle and burglar). Strangely enough according to Wikipedia, Oxford University recommends using -ise for its public relations material because it is more accepted by the public.
Read anything from the 17th century...spelling is merely a convention

Go back a couple more centuries and the language of England was then apparently closest to modern day............American English! The rhotic pronunciation taken to American took root there and changed far less than in England over the centuries. Spelling conventions are, as you say, just whatever was commonly agreed, for example when printing really took off.
I've lived in the US my whole live and never heard anyone use the word "burglarizer" in the way bristollad describes. If someone did, that person would sound really weird, like an idiot trying to sound intelligent by making up big words. But to Mantrik's point:

It depends where you go in the States, because our vowels vary widely geographically (some of that has to do with migration and immigration patterns from Britain. There's a funny inversion: the Southern colonies wound up with linguistic traits you would associate with Northern England, and the reverse for the Northern colonies, where the hard "r" sound you observe is less pronounced. (Bostonians don't appreciate Modern Art, but they do like Mahden Aht.)

Meanwhile, in the mid-South and parts of Appalachia to the present day, you will find some vowels that Spenser or Shakespeare would recognize. Consider the vowel sound in the words "caught" and "sought." In my part of the world, the vowel sounds are identical to "cot" and "sot." They are indistinguishable. In New York, those the "au" and "ou" vowels are an open "o" sound that is hard to describe but you'd know it if you hear it because it's exaggerated in tough-guy movies and rap albums. But in Tennessee... it's almost Chaucerian. The vowel sound in "caught" corresponds more or less to how it is spelled. Similarly for "sought" (if that word is still in anyone's lexicon there). Like this: "I CAWt chlamydia from Melania Trump." or "I SOWT medical attention for the chlamydia I got from Melania Trump," where I would have COT it and a Vinnie the Stereotypical New Yorker would have CWOT it.

Norwegian
Posts: 1374
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Norwegian » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:54 am

Interesting video on Bernie Sanders' accent:
phpBB [video]

MiphamFan
Posts: 933
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:46 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by MiphamFan » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:11 am

I like the New York accent and New England accents in general more than "General American". Pity they are dying.

Bristollad
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:39 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Bristollad » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:48 am

DGA wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:42 am

I've lived in the US my whole live and never heard anyone use the word "burglarizer" in the way bristollad describes. If someone did, that person would sound really weird, like an idiot trying to sound intelligent by making up big words.
I’ve only heard it once, by Judge Judy on her courtroom programme, and yes, it struck me the way you suggest.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9259
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by DGA » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:06 pm

Bristollad wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:48 am
DGA wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:42 am

I've lived in the US my whole live and never heard anyone use the word "burglarizer" in the way bristollad describes. If someone did, that person would sound really weird, like an idiot trying to sound intelligent by making up big words.
I’ve only heard it once, by Judge Judy on her courtroom programme, and yes, it struck me the way you suggest.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Judge Judy is the picture of what a dumb American thinks a clever person must be. Trump too.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28051
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Malcolm » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:43 pm

DGA wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:42 am

I've lived in the US my whole live and never heard anyone use the word "burglarizer" in the way bristollad describes.
I have heard the term "burglarize" in gangster movies from the 1930's. But never in modern language. Must be a cop term:

"Three Stooges Burglarize Cell Phone Store"
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

Simon E.
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Simon E. » Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:15 pm

However, Captain Beefheart wants to Booglarize Ya Baby....
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9259
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by DGA » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:10 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:43 pm
DGA wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:42 am

I've lived in the US my whole live and never heard anyone use the word "burglarizer" in the way bristollad describes.
I have heard the term "burglarize" in gangster movies from the 1930's. But never in modern language. Must be a cop term:

"Three Stooges Burglarize Cell Phone Store"
Burglarize, sure, but burglarizer? Someone who burglarizes is a burglar, a thief, &c.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9259
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by DGA » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:13 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:15 pm
However, Captain Beefheart wants to Booglarize Ya Baby....
It works best on West German TV. "a right burlesque title..."



IMO it's the weakest track on what must be Beefheart's strongest album.

I can and sometimes do listen to this crap all day long.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28051
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by Malcolm » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:29 pm

DGA wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:13 pm
Simon E. wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:15 pm
However, Captain Beefheart wants to Booglarize Ya Baby....
It works best on West German TV. "a right burlesque title..."



IMO it's the weakest track on what must be Beefheart's strongest album.

I can and sometimes do listen to this crap all day long.

I believe it. I have seen your facial hair.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

amanitamusc
Posts: 1149
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: -ise vs -ize

Post by amanitamusc » Sat Jan 20, 2018 1:36 am

Just wondering.Did you ever sprort a beard Malcolm?

Post Reply

Return to “Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Fa Dao and 36 guests