Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: "to reason" (for and) "against reading"...

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007

    "to reason" (for and) "against reading"...

    I've just begun re-reading L.L.L.
    Also begun feeling my way around here.

    Have some comments which maybe I can get some responses for.

    To begin with, should the spelling remain "labour" and not be chnaged to "labor" in a new reading?

    The "our" spelling will not match the way the word is spelt in the newspaper.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    "Two nations divided by a common language". Shaw
    AE and BE are variants of the same language and do not (yet) require translation one from the other. If I were quoting an AE text, I would retain the AE spelling. Conversely, BE spellings should be retained by AE quoters.
    A translation from one language to another obviously demands substitution. eg the German for "Sonnet" is "Sonett".
    I find the apostrophe in "Labour's" annoying, however. It was probably a printer's error and has been retained ever since.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts