Joshuamonkey wrote:west wrote:I tend to use "ised" instead of "ized" myself, personally, but I despise Americans who use "our" instead of "or" in color, armor, etc. They just seem pretentious. I don't mind it if Brits or other people who learned it that way do it, but for people for whom American is their first language it just comes off as annoying. I don't care if it "looks cooler".
American is my first language, but with some words I'm used to the "our" and then "or" seems weird to me. It just depends on how I learned the word I guess, especially armour. Generally I use the "or" though.
And because of Cantr I'm more used to "aluminium."
Amazingly weird that you chose to respond to a two year old thread on this subject, because less than 24 hours ago, I wrote in an email:
gejyspa wrote:> If this was just humour, that's fine too.
>
[I]t wasn't humour, but it might have been humor,
since I am a REAL American
(the recipient was also American)
Joshuamonkey wrote:What annoys me is how American grammar puts the punctuation mark before the quotation mark! I don't want to be the correct way unless the punctuation mark is in the quotation mark. Sometimes it could be misleading otherwise.
Getting a bit off topic..
On the other hand, I do agree with you here. It's what's called "logical quotation" as opposed to "typographic quotation", at least on OEDILF, where I am an editor (and we allow both styles). But as a computer programmer, where punctuation often has very specific effects, it's very important to know what is or is not included in a string of characters.
I mostly just use Councilor these days though. Oh, and I noticed that someone used the word "Harbor" in the name of a harbour, even though Cantr doesn't spell it that way. 
Dimho Liaious = Dim- oh Lee-oww-us (I really hope nobody ever tries to change that name, it's awesome. )
