Print

---

Funny! Funny! Funny!

This post has convinced me that even though I speak and write 'Merican,
from henceforth, as a PWP, I shall have a tremour (even though my spell
checker doesn't recognize it) rather than a tremor. Seems so much more
refined and genteel, don't you think. Thanks Peter for converting me.
Maybe I should get my own personal copy of Fowler's. (Man, he sure used
some big words didn't he?)

> ----------
> From:         Peter Kidd[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:         Friday, August 21, 1998 2:02 PM
> To:   Multiple recipients of list PARKINSN
> Subject:      Non PD: the 'our' vs 'or' debate
>
> Hello all,
>
> The editor in me can't refrain from making a comment on this issue.
> It's
> probably more than anyone on the list wants to know, but what the
> heck. We
> Canadians have a split personality on the question because of our
> history.
> As Canadians on the list know, this argument arises regularly in
> Canada.
>
> Here is an extract from my copy of Fowler's English Usage and as
> always, in
> my opinion, Fowler makes good sense.
>
> =======================================
> -our and -or.  The American abolition of -our in such words as honour
> and
> favour has probably retarded rather than quickened English progress in
> the
> same direction.  Our first notification that the book we are reading
> is not
> English but American is often, nowadays, the sight of an -or, 'Yankee'
> we
> say, and congratulate ourselves on spelling like gentlemen; we wisely
> decline to regard it as a matter for argument.  The English way cannot
> but
> be better than the American way; that is enough. Most of us,
> therefore, do
> not come to the question with an open mind.  Those who are willing to
> put
> national prejudice aside and examine the facts soon realize, first,
> that the
> British -our words are much fewer in proportion to the -or words than
> they
> supposed, and, secondly, that there seems to be no discoverable line
> between
> the two sets so based on principle as to serve any useful purpose.  By
> the
> side of favour there is horror , beside ardour pallor, beside odour
> tremor,
> and so forth.  Of agent nouns saviour (with its echo paviour, itself
> now
> tending towards pavior) is perhaps the only one that retains -our,
> governor
> being the latest to shed its -u -. What is likely to happen is either
> that,
> when some general reform of spelling is consented to, reduction of
> -our
> to -or will be one of the least disputed items, or that, failing
> general
> reform, we shall see word after word in -our go the way of governour.
> It is
> not worth while either to resist such a gradual change or to fly in
> the face
> of national sentiment by trying to hurry it; it would need a very open
> mind
> indeed in an Englishman to accept armor and succor with equanimity.
> Those
> who wish to satisfy themselves that it is right to deny any value to
> the -our spelling should go to the article -or in the OED for fuller
> information than there is room for here.
> =====================
>
>  TTFN
> Peter
>
> PS: I still lean to using the 'our' form, but have gradually dropped
> other
> redundant consonants and vowels such as the second 'm' in program (and
> of
> course, the extraneous 'e'. However, I do find it hard to accept
> American
> pronunciation of 'program' as 'pog-ram'!  Maybe Americans should go
> back to
> 'programme.':)
>
> PPS: Canadians are all over the map on this spelling issue and it is
> partially regional.
>
> **********************************************************************
> ****
> Peter Kidd
> Learning Materials Consulting Services
> 62 Coronation Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3N 2M6 Canada
> Tel/FAX: (902) 443-4262 Email: [log in to unmask]
> URL: http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~aa163/peterkidd.html
>