« The Magic of Letters | Main | Home is Where We Find Ourselves »
February 27, 2009
British VS American English
Learning a new language is always a daunting challenge. The English language is difficult enough to learn even without the usual differences in accents and regional variations. And then there is the never clear, and always confusing set of differences between British and American….
usage. George Bernard Shaw is reputed to be the first to make the observation that America and Britain are “divided by a common language”. Let’s look at a few of these differences for two reasons. The first is that learners of English might be quite confused – especially regarding what might be correct usage in any given situation, and, second, those of us who speak (or write) in either “brand” of English might be a little more flexible in our tolerance for regional differences.
Articles (a, an,the) for example, are particularly confusing for Asian students of English. It might be a little consoling to realize that we native speakers of English are not as consistent as one might think.
In American English, for example, we put an article (a, an,the) before virtually every noun; the cat, a house, an elephant (I’ll develop the distinction between a and an in a later post – it can be quite confusing ). In America, we might say, “He went to the hospital”. In Britain, the proper usage would be, “He went to hospital”.
I must admit that I am not fully clear on the British use of articles. It seems to me that, in British English, articles are used for common nouns, but not for institutions. (If any of our readers has any clear summary of this principle, please send it to us.)
A learner of English needs to decide which (American or British) style of English they wish to focus on – or they could do what Canadians and Australians do – and master both and use them as needed.
I love the English language – but even I find it infuriating and inconsistent – at least it doesn’t have multiple tones like some languages.
Sometimes, in my more philosophical moments, it seems to me that true mastery of any language is beyond possibility - even among native speakers. Consider how differently, for example, men women use language.
I take comfort in the fact that we are all learning and no one is perfect.
Join me in the struggle to communicate.
My best to you,
Morf
Listen, read and speak. Make your new language your own.
About the author of this entry:
Morf has a B.A.from the Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington and an MAT (Master's in Teaching English) from the University of Washington (Seattle). Morf spent about six years working for a Native American Tribal College, a few years teaching various humanities, English, writing and ESL courses with the community college system in Washington State (including one year as part of a faculty exchange program with The Beijing Foreign Language University). While in China, Morf was briefly a radio host for CRI (China Radio International) and did recordings for the "English can be enjoyable" book and tape series. Morf currently teaches English and writing for a local technical/vocational college with many international students. Morf prefers international and independent films, foods he can't pronounce, music no one else likes and riding his bicycle in unlikely and ridiculous situations.
Morf is also quietly anticipating that unexpected, but lucrative job offer.
Posted by mmorf at February 27, 2009 10:20 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.esl-lesson-plan.com/mt-tb.cgi/380
Comments
Morf,
Perhaps I am out of line here, but it seems that Americans too have some verbal issues with institutions and the definite article.
For example, Americans "go to detention," "go to jail," "go to school," "go to college," "go to court," "go to town," and "go to church." In Boston, they even go "down basement"! In each of these instances, they don't put "the" before any of these indisputable "places" whether they are institutions or not. They can even be "in" each of these places/institutions without an article, e.g., "in detention," "In jail," "in school," "in college," "in court," "in town," and "in church."
Each of those frequent American usage patterns can simultaneously suggest that the referent noun is, to me, either a state-of-being or condition in addition to a place. For some reason, American speakers are the ones who seem inconsistent when it comes to the concept of hospitalization (the example you provided in this post). American speakers want to go to "the" hospital (as if one takes precedence over another) rather than "to hospital." Logic dictates that one is "in hospital" just as s/he may be "in surgery," "in recovery," "in I.C.U.," or even "in bed." It is British speakers who are consistent on this one.
Now, I just wonder why they aren't "in pub" (an indisputable institution)?
Once again, I could be mistaken.
What say ye?
~Lee Hobbs
Posted by: Lee Hobbs at February 27, 2009 01:25 PM
Lee,
Ah yes, American consistency (and not just in language)is not something I would bet on.
Just this morning I was listening to the radio and heard a radio host describe a program as explaining a complex issue in 55 minutes. Did he mean that 55 minutes from now he would describe the issue? Or did he mean that the program (at an unspecified time) would use 55 minutes to explain the issue? I as a listener was left hanging - and could only use the context and prior knowledge to interpret the 55 minute dilemma.
I use this example because it is typical of the problems we get into as we learn a language. We are not always clear - or perhaps we are convinced that we are "clear enough".
Perhaps to complicate things further, there are times when one would say "go to the jail" or "I am going to the school" or, even better, "I am going to the church".
The distinction makes me dizzy - but if I say that I am "going to church" or "going to the church", am I not saying two separate things?
Perhaps I am in a regional whirlpool here, but it seems to me that if I say that I am going "to church" I mean that I am going to participate, whereas if I am going "to the church" I mean to say that I am going to the building.
Is there some background of choice here? I have no problem going to the jail (I used to teach classes in my local jail) but if I have to "go to jail" I will not like it at all.
In other words, do we use "the" to put some distance in our sentences?
One of the things I love (and hate) about English American-style is that each speaker (to some degree) makes the language their own.
In some ways I am a stickler about proper grammar - but I do make mistakes and I even occasionally
find the proper context for an "ain't" or a "gonna". You can file me under "inconsistent American".
Posted by: Morf at February 27, 2009 02:00 PM
Yes, language is not static--it is organic. And, in the post-modern climate anyway, it also seems "relative."
Great post,
Lee Hobbs
Posted by: Lee Hobbs at February 27, 2009 02:11 PM
Even though it makes some of my friends crazy, I like the word "relative" for a couple of reasons. First, my premise is that a thriving language is inherently alive - meaning bound by and defined by its context, and second "relative" reminds me that we all, whether we speak the same language or not, are, in a basic sense, "related". Long before the Internet, "social networking" was key to survival.
Many Native American peoples have a term that translates as "All my relations" meaning everything alive. We use our words to "link" with each other - our animals and our descendants, among many others.
Our language may never be perfect - or even firmly established, but it does seem to work.
Any thoughts from any other readers?
Morf
Posted by: Morf at February 27, 2009 02:57 PM
Language is fun, half the time people don't say what they really mean and don't mean what they say.It can be used to deceive, to hide motives.Meaning is conveyed by text, context, class, tone,pitch, stress and body language.We can communicate without language, but with language, we become inventive and palyful.Words can heal as well as kill; persuade, alienate,delight, annoy; they can be contentious,spiteful, emotional, sensible and sometimes downright silly.
Posted by: A G Maxwell at March 27, 2009 06:34 AM
i have two comments to make,one relevant to your article about articles; in English , when the indefinite article "a" is followed by a noun beginning with a vowel eg., otter, then "an"s used, otherwise it becomes unpronounceable...it must be an otter, an elephant, etc., the only exception i can think of is "an Hotel", but there ,because the word is derived from French, the H is silent, so the rule still applies.
The other thing is quite different; in jobs ads, when Chinese schools etc are listing their preferred list of English speaking nationalities they would like to employ, they never mention South Africa or Zimbabwe, where they speak much better classically pronounced English than the Aussies or Kiwis....have you ever heard a Chinese person speaking whith a "Strine" accent, it's really horrible! It's ugly! The reason why, and I have lived in SA for 20 years, is that in the old days, practically all the English speaking whites, due to their privileged position , received tertiary education, not so the Afrikaners, they were by and large the blue collar whites, and often they didn't speak much English at all. I live in Cape Town, i'm teaching here in China, if you go as far as Stellenbosch, 40 mins from CT, you will find an entirely Arrikaans speaking town, with a great University and a burgeoning Wine region, but it's all Afrikaans speaking.... plus the language of the coloured people is Afrikaans....Most educated South Africans are bi lingual, cos they were taught both at school, nowadays they are starting to teach the 2 main native languages, Xhosa and Zulu in the white schools as well. In the north of SA they teach Pedi, and N and S Sotho as well.
Anyway, I digress, why can't people realise that good English is spoken elsewhere as well? mike
Posted by: mike mc donnell at March 30, 2009 03:20 AM
Come on now.
Its very easy in english english at least.
I can go to hospital or I can go to the hospital.
If I go to hospital, its because I'm sick, and I'll go to any hospital available. Which hospital I go to is unimportant, I just want to be treated at a hospital and I don't much care which.
Its the institution, the function which is important to me: Hospital treatment.
If I go to THE hospital, its because I know which one I want to go to. Its the one where I can see my aunt Fanny. Its the one in my town, or where I work, or where they took my tonsils out.
I went to war. (but any war would do. I was a soldier, fighting whichever enemy my General (Please note it wasn't my Specific.) told me to.)
But if I fought in THE war, it was a specific war; the only war worth talking about!
Posted by: Pete Forrest at May 26, 2009 08:21 AM
