Flavor vs. Flavour 925
An anonymous reader writes "A recent flamewar ensued on the Linux kernel mailing list, this time debating the proper spelling of 'flavor', or is it 'flavour'? Even Linux creator Linus Torvalds joined the fray with some rather humorous comments. For the most part, it sounds like spellings will stay as they are, but it makes for an entertaining read."
Flavor, flavour... (Score:5, Funny)
Linux: It gots much flavah!
Flavah beans and some Chianti (Score:2)
Re:Flavor, flavour... (Score:5, Funny)
Marklar: It gots much marklar!
now everyone can be happy (until it gets to the HOWTOs: "plug the marklar into the marklar, but whatever you do, DO NOT plug it into the marklar.")
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Interesting)
if ( pig > cow ) then horse;
makes for fun codeing.. and a global search and replace right before handing it in makes for good marks... heh(that and the fact that we taught more of the class then the teacher, but she still did a good job with the other students, it's just that there were more of us then her)
I suspect multiple spellings of the same word would have the opposite effect, and i have had issues with it just lately while working with some toolkits that don't use standardized spellings...
I like the solution some have thou, just define the function twice with the same name! If you got the mem for that, it solves a few problems...
Anyway, enough of my ranting...
Re:Oh no! (Score:5, Funny)
{
bustcap;
punk(whitey);
bustcap;
bustcap;
}
That's no flamewar (Score:5, Insightful)
OH NO! HNNGG! BURRRN! TAKE THAT! These guys are obviously flame-war masters, with the powers to bring forth Derek Smart [werewolves.org] levels of binary cacophony.
Re:That's no flamewar (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a light flamewar, they are just less explicit about it... (Eg. "Fucking" vs. "Having Sex")
Re:That's no flamewar (Score:5, Funny)
Please be quiet or I will assault you and have sex with your posterior.
Flavor/Flavour (Score:4, Funny)
"That's too clever! (Score:2)
</simpsons>
<!--Maybe I should've used the groening tag above? Let's argue about it.-->
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Funny)
Apparently, there are a high volume of European developers at SCO, and they evidently own the copyright on the spelling of words with -ou insted of the American English -o.
This is just keeping Linux safe from yet another threat.
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:3, Funny)
Actually, SCO is a US firm so I think that it is in fact a horrible conspiracy destined to give SCO more footing in its lawsuit by saying that if Linux, a kernel developed by an European didn't copy SCO's copyrighted code they wouldn't have the US spelling. Thus, by changing the spelling to US they can claim ownership of more code in 2.6.
We need to stop this conspiracy immediately and translate the whole kernel sources to finnish to put to the ground any allegation of copying!
Common? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Common? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Common? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Common? (Score:4, Insightful)
Google samples the Internet, which is still massively dominated by the US. For instance, "USA" has twice the number of hits as "China". You can't extrapolate much in the real world from that.
The UK is fairly well wired, but other countries, like India, where English is a major language, are not.
English is becoming American (Score:4, Interesting)
What is the English used? American English. My wife even had a document pop up in her email defining what language to use and what words to use. Lo and behold what language dominated? American English, even though the company was not American or British...
The reality is that American English is winning, even among those "common wealth" countires...
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Insightful)
International English follows the British spelling. We Americans should just grin and bear it, and accept the fact that our "English" is nonstandard. (Like Microsoft's implementation of Java, perhaps) In any case, if your target audience is wider than the US (and maybe Japan as the English they use there tends toward American), it is best to use the international spellings - colour, flavour - than our utterly made up spellings. (Damn you Noah Webster! It's all your fault! No, seriously.) I think people gravitate to the US spelling because they are simpler, but they are not more correct. But no one else here in the US is likely to agree with me; I'm probably going to get modded (-1, Flamebait) for this one. Heh.
In short, we should just accept that our English is nonstandard, and use the English every other English-speaking country uses.
-uso.
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:2)
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:3, Informative)
We could argue for years over when dictionary-writing became serious, but most people would probably cite Samuel Johnson's dictionary, published in 1755, about 75 years before Websters. Note that it included only spellings, not definitions.
My real point is this -- it
Webster was a tool. (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in the day when webster was starting out, we Americans has this little disagreement with the Brittish. You might recall that some things were changed just as a nice little #$@# off to the Commonwealth. Case in point: driving on the right side of the road (not to start a flame war, but economically and logically it doesn't make sense)
Well between Webster's desire to change the language himself, and the desire to reduce the number of letters in commonly used words (letters = money for printers) Webster started changing shit just cause he could.
At the point when Webster created his dictionary, the concept that there WAS such a thing as a "correct" spelling was just beginning to take hold.
For correct reason, see quote Robin Williams Live on Broadway 2002 in reference to a parallel situation: King James breaking away from Rome and starting the Anglican church:
"Ha ha! Whose the fucking pope now!"
Re:Webster was a tool. (Score:4, Informative)
Keep in mind that I've looked up several words in the OED over the course of this discussion, and en *every case* the current US spelling was around earlier than Webster. Case in point: "flavor" dates to no later than 1641, and pollibly as early as the 1300s, though I doubt my reading of the entry as far as that in concerned (however, if correct, "flavor" predates "flavour"). Same goes with center, color, and favor.
Re:Webster was a tool. (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason most USian words are around earlier is because they're from pre-Norman Britain. We modified our language to be more pallatable to the Gallic nobles running the country, e.g. adopting the prefix -our over -or, -re over -er, -ise over -ize, and so on.
Let's use "centre" as an example. The French pronounce and spell it -re ("son-tre" for centre). The US prounounce and spell it -er ("sen-ter" for center). We Brits pronounce it -er and spell it -re.
In case you're wondering, center/centre is from the Latin centrum, so the French were right.
Re:Webster was a tool. (Score:3, Interesting)
"The French were right"
You're talking about years of language changes; you can't simply say that the French were correct, especially when you're dealing with pronunciation changes. English is German, it's Celtic, it's French, and it's full of lingo from around the globe. To make the judgement that one spelling is correct over another--when there are two societies separated by an ocean--is absurd.
Again, I'm taking this well beyond the reasonable level, but language is dictated by s
Damned postmodernism! (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, but if you go down that route, where do you stop? There are two main schools of thought in linguistics - those who believe in a prescriptive role for the study of language (i.e. grammar books dictate what is correct and what is not) and those who believe it should have a more descriptive role (i.e. it describes what is actually in use). Now, if we take the descriptive model to then dictate what is and isn't correct, at what point does one stop
Re:Webster was a tool. (Score:4, Informative)
They could do no worse than the old English that the English themselves had discarded...The reason most USian words are around earlier is because they're from pre-Norman Britain.
Let's test this hypothesis with a little Old English, the language of pre-Norman England. Here are the first five lines of Beowulf (no cluster jokes please), the best known work of Old English literature (using the modern alphabet since slashcode doesn't like Old English characters):
Hwaet, we gar-dena in geardagum,
theodcyninga thrym gefrunon,
hu tha aethelingas ellen fremedon!
oft Scyld Scefing sceathena threatum,
monegum maegthum meodosetla ofteah,
Now if you can recognise American English in there, I want some of whatever you're taking. The plain fact is that Old English is a completely "foreign" language to modern English speakers. The first texts we could recognise as English are 14th century (eg Chaucer), which are written in Middle English - which shares a similar grammar to moden English, but a very different vocabulary. From between the 11th and 14th centuries, when English took on a recognisable form, there are no written documents in English surviving, because the languages of the literate classes were French and Latin. Moreover, the major differences between US and British spelling are almost all in words deriving from French rather than OE. For example, Old English for colour is "beo" (couleur in French).
We Brits pronounce it -er and spell it -re.
On a lighter note, we Brits may spell "-re", but we don't pronounce "er", unless you're from the West Country. it's "centa" through & thru.
Oh, and if you want to know how Beowulf opens on modern english:
LO, praise of the prowess of people-kings
of spear-armed Danes, in days long sped,
we have heard, and what honor the athelings won!
Oft Scyld the Scefing from squadroned foes,
from many a tribe, the mead-bench tore,
Re:Webster was a tool. (Score:3, Insightful)
In contrast, the French language institute is so uptight about preserving the 'integrity' of the French language that it comes up with 'correct' terminology e.g. 'courriel' for 'e-mail'.
Re:Webster was a tool. (Score:3, Informative)
Please, please, please. It was HENRY VIII who broke with Rome and founded the Anglican church, because the Pope wouldn't give him a divorce. Between him and James I there were three other monarchs (Edward VI, Mary, Elizabeth I), four if you count Lady Jane Gray's brief "rule". I presume that the reason you think James I was responsible for Anglicanism is the King James Bible - though this was solidly plagiarised from Wycliff's much earli
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Funny)
You mention Samuel Johnson... I just have to quote from Blackadder:
Dr. Johnson:
This book, sir, contains every word in our beloved language.
Edmund:
Every word, sir?
Dr. Johnson:
Every word, sir.
Edmund:
Well, in that case, sir, I hope you will not object if I also offer the doctor my most enthusiastic contrafibularities.
Dr. Johnson:
What??
Edmund:
Contrafibularities, sir. It is a common word down our way.
Dr. Johnson:
Damn!
Edmund:
Oh, I'm sorry, sir. I'm anaspeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused you such pericumbobulation.
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:4, Informative)
There are are so many basic historico-linguistic errors running through this thread that I don't know where to start, but here's as good a one as any. Johnson's dictionary most emphatically DID include definitions. It would never have gained the status it did otherwise - indeed most of the interest in it today comes from its delightfully politically incorrect definitions. For example:
Oats: a grain which in England is given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people.
Pension: pay given to a state hireling for treason to his country
Patron: A wretch who supports with indolence, and is rewarded with flattery
Of course these are only partial definitons - Johnson also included more useful descriptions, together with examples of their use. It is this which makes Johnson's dictionary the true forebear of all English dictionaries.
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Funny)
Wasn't that in response to calling "french fries" "freedom fries"?
You know, given the politics surrounding that war, the righteous thing for Americans to do would have been to start referring to french fries as "chips"... ;)
Non-standard? Nope. (Score:3, Funny)
You have to love a creative country where an actor was President and the Terminator might become a Governor. At least they don't take politics as seriously as some have spelling.
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Funny)
No wonder I freeze up all the time when trying to talk to people!
Re:Modern British English is non standard too (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone got into the habit of spelling beere as beer. Before you know it over time it became known as beer.
My point is that english is always changing and both the American and English versions today are correct. A century and a half of isolation is what caused the American drift in standard english. Today because of television, education, and the internet, Britian and the US are knitted back together.
Infact English is still changing thanks to the internet. The way we use nouns as adjuctives for technical slang is changing it some more.
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Funny)
Re:U.S. spelling has the original forms (Score:3, Insightful)
This doesn't make either "standard" per se, but, since the study of language is the study of trends, it's safe to say the trend in English is toward a British style of spelling and not an American one.
(I mean, not all of those countries follow exactly the British. Canada, for instan
Re:U.S. spelling has the original forms (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:U.S. spelling has the original forms (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course I doubt the literacy of the rest of the 506 million is as high as 97%.
Re:U.S. spelling has the original forms (Score:5, Interesting)
I say lorry, and so do most other Brits that I know.
If you check Mr. Shakespeare's manuscripts, you'll find color, not colour,
As Shakespeare supposedly spelled his own name in 27 different ways (Shakespear, shakespere etc), I don't think he's a useful guide.
and the pronounciation and spelling of alumin(i)um (Brits "aluMINIum", Yanks "ALUminum") started out the American way, until those bloody English blokes started going continental on us for a while
It actually started as Alumium, but Sir Humphrey Davy (who first named it) for some reason then changed his mind and called it aluminum. The Brits (and as far as I understand, the rest of the English speaking world outside of the US) decided to use aluminium because it fitted better with everything else that he'd named (magnesium, barium, calcium etc).
And how can you argue that British English is getting more quaint (attractively old-fashioned) and then point out that the the US actually uses the old-fashioned spelling?
Re:U.S. spelling has the original forms (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, by the w
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:3, Interesting)
Aluminium is an element, it was discovered, not "invented", and not by an American.
Aluminium history [snelsons.co.uk]
"In 1809 [Sir Humphrey] Davy [English] fused iron in contact with alumina in an electric arc to produce an iron Aluminium alloy; for a split instant, before it joined the iron, Aluminium existed in its free metallic state for perhaps the first time since the world was formed"
Sir Humphrey Davy [sdsc.edu]
"In 1825, Hans Christian Oersted [Danish]
Not quite (Score:4, Interesting)
So The Medical Centre, and you center your sights on a target.
Re:Not quite (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately, sir, you are incorrect. Up here in Canada, as you put it, centre is always spelled -re unless one is referring to an object in the United States.
We still centre our sights on targets, albeit without handguns. Americans are the only ones who center anything.
As far as objects go, yes, Med Centre remains as such, although, the Kennedy Space Center is spelled in the American fashion.
Re:Not quite (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not quite (Score:5, Funny)
Then why don't you spell it as "about a yard"?
Re:Flavor/Flavour (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language#
"Compared to British English, American English is conservative in its phonology. It is often claimed that certain rural areas in North America speak "Elizabethan English," but in fact the standard American English of the upper Midwest has a sound profile much closer to seventeenth century English than the current speech of England has."
"American English has some small differences from British English. American English has both spelling and grammatical differences from British English, some of which were made as part of an attempt to rationalize the English spelling used by British English at the time. Unlike many 20th century language reforms (e.g., Turkey's alphabet shift, Norway's spelling reform) the American spelling changes were not driven by government, but by textbook writers and dictionary makers.
The first American dictionary was written by Noah Webster in 1828. At the time America was a relatively new country and Webster's particular contribution was to show that the region spoke a different dialect from Britain, and so he wrote a dictionary with many spellings differing from the standard. Many of these changes were initiated unilaterally by Webster.
Webster also argued for many "simplifications" to the idiomatic spelling of the period. Somewhat ironically, many, although not all, of his simplifications fell into common usage alongside the original versions, resulting in a situation even more confused than before.
Many words are shortened and differ from other versions of English. Words such as center are used instead of centre in other versions of English. And there are many other variations. "
decided a long time ago (Score:2)
1. most of the original code was written in europe, so they use many european spellings, and
2. changing spellings globally often breaks things, so it's something they just don't do anymore.
Slow news day? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Slow news day? (Score:5, Funny)
Goodbye Karma... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Goodbye Karma... (Score:2)
So let me get this straight... (Score:5, Funny)
Man, if I'd only subscribed I could have seen this way early!
Re:So let me get this straight... (Score:4, Funny)
Seriously, is this an example of hero-worship gone too far?
I don't want to start a flamewar... (Score:5, Funny)
Hmm (Score:5, Funny)
I fail to see how this relates to eyeball juices.
Here you go... (Score:3, Informative)
Next!
Chant with me! (Score:2)
Chant with me, poll, poll, poll...
Re:Chant with me! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Here you go... (Score:3, Informative)
Read: The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of our version of the English Language
Re:Here you go... (Score:5, Informative)
Here are the relavent lines from the entry:
"Forms: . 4- flavor, 5 Sc. flewoure, 5- flavour. . 6 Sc. fleoure, fleure, fleowre, fleware, -ere, 8 Sc. flaur."
and the help file:
"Variant forms are the alternative spellings in which a word has been found over the centuries. Centuries are given in abbreviated form in the Second Edition. For instance, 4-8 should be read as 14th to 18th centuries, and 1 means before 1100 AD."
The above is the best guess as to what the numbers mean in the entry itself, but that would mean that the other forms which look like Old English would be more recent. Also, in the quotations given "flavour" precedes "flavor" in time. So I'm confused.
Anyway, the entry for "favour, favor" says "As in other words with the same ending, the spelling with -our is preferred in the British Isles, while in the U.S. -or is more common."
The answer is simple! (Score:3, Funny)
The Microsoft equivalent (Score:5, Funny)
You know... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:You know... (Score:2)
They said he was correct. I even responded after the contest complaining that Wales wasn't even a fucking country, but was part of the United Kingdom (Just like England isn't a country.) The response, "That's what it says on my card, so you are wrong."
American's (I am American) can't even spell aluminium correctly.
Not a 'country' (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I think technically Wales is a principality, officially joined to England as a subsidiary entity by The Statute of Rhuddlan in 1284, codifying what was accomplished on the battlefield two years earlier. The Union Jack of the UK is formed from individual flags of the three kingdoms (although the Irish abandoned the Cross of St. Patrick in favor of their current tricolor when the Republic was formed) with no reference to Wales whatsoever.
The Real Grudge (Score:3, Insightful)
If I were in your place, I'd hold a grudge against tests.
Grill vs. Grille (Score:3, Funny)
There are also false "grilles" which still serve beer, burgers, and fries but are cleaner and with better decor to throw you off. You'll find a lot of guys in ties in them.
I got it! (Score:3, Funny)
Honestly, a debate like this cannot be resolved in a flamewar, a spelling bee on the other hand....
At least argue about spelling an important word! (Score:2)
Now there is a good word, and a good spelling.
I'm an American, but spelling mostly affected by playing a Swedish mud...
nuclearwar.astrakan.hig.se 4080
Next in your sound card config (Score:5, Funny)
In RDesktop land.... (Score:2)
license and licence
Fork it and Forget it. (Score:5, Funny)
signed,
BSD
SO let me get this straight..... (Score:5, Funny)
1.Flavore
2.Flevor
3.Flirst Porst
4.PROFIT!!!
This *IS* irony... (Score:4, Funny)
It changes all occurrences of 'flavour' to 'flavor' in the complete tree;
I've just comiled all affected files (that is, the config resulting from
make allyesconfig minus already broken stuff) succesfully on i386.
Non-standard (American) Spelling (Score:3, Interesting)
I live in New Zealand, yes one of those countries colonised by the great British empire. Here of course we write with the British spelling (ie. English spelling used by the rest of the world). However this is under threat from the ever prevalent American spelling, mostly due to the internet, and things like Microsoft Word and e-mail spell checkers defaulting to the US spelling (Yes I know how to change it but very many people do not - Actually I use LaTeX so this is a moot point for me). Teachers used to mark this alternative spelling quite harshly, but now I feel they are giving up.
This raised a few issues, for me mostly when I find information on the internet I am conscious to try with both spellings. I got caught out in Bugzilla with this.
Interestingly the changes the US have made to the language not only include spelling changes, But also grammatical [gsu.edu]. An example is "to dream" the American is: "dreamed" whilst the British is: "dreamt". These grammatical differences are seen in all American movies and TV shows shown around the world.
I am not American bashing in any way, but these issues are non-trivial.
an element of seriousness (seriosness?) (Score:5, Informative)
As you can see, one part of this header is spelled with a u and the other without. This could create some developer confusion.
Re:an element of seriousness (seriosness?) (Score:3, Interesting)
Easy to resolve. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a resolution to it. The 'recognised' standard for American English is Websters - and it allows both flavor and flavour (and color and colour). The recognised standard for British English is the Oxford English dictionary - and it recognises ONLY flavour and colour.
Hence, the most compatible choice is Flavour and Colour since those should be recognisable on both sides of the atlantic where Flavor and Color are most definitely mis-spellings of British English.
Case solved!
New Oxford American Dictionary (Score:4, Informative)
As a US citizen, I for one don't recognize(-se) Webster's as my standard...I much prefer the New Oxford American Dictionary, (2001). Webster's just seems a little to casual and not as rigorously researched and edited. Besides, the N.O.A.D. is from the same organization as the Oxford English Dictionary, the British standard, so it is IMHO in the best position to illustrate the American vs. British language variants.
Which, BTW, the New Oxford American Dictionary specifies flavor only, with a parenthetical note that the British spelling happens to be flavour. But in American English, flavour is not an acceptable spelling.
On a side note, the web community seems to need help with their spelling too. Consider:
Re:New Oxford American Dictionary (Score:3, Informative)
From http://www.apache.org/~rbowen/presentations/urlmap ping/slide35.html [apache.org];
BSD? (Score:4, Funny)
Mark Twain had it right: (Score:5, Insightful)
This age old fight really bothers me. (Score:3, Insightful)
But this really bothers me, I am american so I naturally leave off the u, but it doesn't matter to me when people add a "u" or reverse an "er" or switch a "z" and an "s" or say lorry.
Why do so many americans act like some foriegner is destroying their language whenever this happens? And why do so many British English speakers smuggly act like their spelling or phrasing is clearly more intelligent, refined or whatever? Do you all act the same way to non-english words? you have to assume that spelling will either homogenize, or that multiple spellings will become universally accepted, with the internet bringing all these english speakers together and whatnot. I recently heard a piece on the radio about South Africa which made the claim that it was becoming much more common for youths to intermix various words from the various languages in the country, because since the end of apartheid people are being brought together much more.
Of course recently I've been listening to the BBC World Service at night and it did take a few days to get used to the reporters fondness for the word "row" as in "argument" which I had never heard before, not to mention a use of the term "washing-up liquid" that I found quite humorous
American spellings, definitions taking over? (Score:4, Interesting)
The point of mentioning this is that from what I've heard the American definitions of billion, trillion, etc are becoming more popular in the UK.
Being an American I've always thought the English definitions were inconsistant, since they have a seperate name for 10^0, 10^3, 10^6, but then suddenly start only giving seperate names at 10^6 intervals.
Obviously the spelling of flavour vs flavor is fairly irrelevant, and doesn't have the same issues as the definition of billion does. But I'm still curious if spellings have that same bleed-over factor.
What about creat() (Score:3, Funny)
Gee-zous Ker-iced (Score:5, Interesting)
Now this.
If we all spent this time coding and debugging instead of debating crap like this that simply does not matter, Linux would be the first totally error and bug free OS on the planet.
Grep and see the horror! (Score:3, Funny)
British is better. (Score:4, Interesting)
this makes it possible to work out general meanings of words if you don't know the exact definition.
consider:
centre
centripetal
centrifuge
--common stem "centr"
theatre
theatrical
--common stem "theatr"
the American spelling may seem simple, but it is very shallow. Individual words may be spelt more like how they sound (or seem to sound), but the relationships between words are lost.
consider the US spelling of "center" with the stem "cent"; this suggests a meaning to do with the number 100.
this is probably why the US comes up with retarded stuff like phonics?
The solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Just like case-insensitivity I think grep should have a non-strict English match setting. This could do a match on both colour and color if either is found.
Perhaps even an option on the compilers? (But this is more dangerous, and can be acompanied by compiler warnings...)
Diversity is a good thing, right?
Where Do You Live? (Score:3, Informative)
A sad, sad look at myself (Score:3, Funny)
The correct spelling (Score:3, Funny)
Re:depends where you're from (Score:5, Funny)
"Standard language is just a dialect with an army" (Score:3, Interesting)
The "flavour/flavor" variation was part of an attempt by Noah Webster to simplify and make more consistent the spelling of words in the American dialect. One can argue whether the attempt was misguided or not, but it certainly hasn't been the only one. George Bernard Shaw also tried to make spelling more consistent (see the preface of his play "Pygmalion" for more detail).
Changing stan
Re:"Standard language is just a dialect with an ar (Score:3, Funny)
Ok, gotta' quote this:
A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
by Mark Twain
For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4
Re:Let's get serious.... (Score:2)
Or I beat them up
When it comes to painfully annoying common mistakes like "woundering" instead of "wondering" or "alot" instead of "a lot" my lizard brain wants to beat them up instantly.
Guess I'm just a spelling nazi a
Re:As much as I like Linux (Score:2)
Re:Lets use another language... (Score:5, Funny)
They speak English in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc. and in America, they speak American. Also they pronounce the letter z wrong. it's Zed, not Zee. And they think Kraft dinner is Kraft mac & cheese (and food, for that matter), and the beer tastes like watered down piss. etc.
Differences in countries are stupid to debate about, because there's no right answer, just differences.
Re:Google says... (Score:5, Funny)
Eminem - 2,230,000
Mozart - 1,970,000
Burger - 1,670,000
Caviar - 575,000
Piss - 2,750,000
Chardonnay - 742,000
Your point?