how is correct "english english" or "british

Gina   Sun Jan 15, 2006 1:42 pm GMT
how is correct "english english" or "british english" ?
JJM   Sun Jan 15, 2006 4:29 pm GMT
No more "correct" than any other kind of English.

What exactly do you mean?
Claude   Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:28 pm GMT
West of the Pond you can call it American English.

But east of the Pond, just call it English.

Is that what you wanted to know ?
Sander   Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:00 pm GMT
=>But east of the Pond, just call it English.
<=

No, then you call it British English.
Claude   Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:25 pm GMT
Sander you are quite right. Thanks.
Travis   Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:47 pm GMT
>>West of the Pond you can call it American English.

But east of the Pond, just call it English.<<

Actually, west of the Pond, you can call it North American English, since such forms a single continuous dialect continuum and cannot be easily divided along political boundaries except in a few notable locations like the border between the US and Canada at Detroit/Windsor.

As for east of the Pond, there exist English English, Welsh English, Scottish English (besides Scots proper, which is separate from such), and Irish English. Such do not comprise a single "British English", being no more closely tied to each other than they are to North American English; consequently, the term "British English" should be reserved for speaking about literary standards, e.g. those pertaining to spelling.
Jim   Mon Jan 16, 2006 12:00 am GMT
If you mean spelling, then "Commonwealth English" would be the best term because except for the Americans we all spell pretty much the same.
Uriel   Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:06 am GMT
If you are talking about the English spoken in, and only in, England, you can properly call it English English, because British English would also include the dialects spoken in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Just be aware that the phrase "English English" sounds a little funny, since it's repetitive.
Guest   Mon Jan 16, 2006 3:06 am GMT
"The English spoken in England" is unambiguous.
Uriel   Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:56 am GMT
But long, especially when for every other variety you can use a much shorter phrase -- American English, Canadian English, Jamaican English, etc.
Guest   Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:21 am GMT
It is because "English English" will often fail.
Guest   Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:23 am GMT
...fail to be interpreted correctly.
Claude   Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:54 pm GMT
What about English spoken the way Indians do it in the subcontinent, and even still for a long time once abroad ?

Ok. Indians have been ruled by Britons for centuries. Nevertherless I would not call "Indian English" "British English". I would call it rather "Rough English". Am I wrong ?

I have nothing against British Majesties and Indians. Why should I ? Indian is my second Home and I appreciate the way they have been tought to queue.

But the Indian way of speaking English is an escapable reality, and because of its likeable side and its numerous native speakers, it should not be left to one side.

What do you think about it ? Thanks for your comments.

Cheers. Claude.
Claude   Mon Jan 16, 2006 2:14 pm GMT
Oh my God, what did I say ? "Rough" I was meaning only the way English sounds sometimes.... when spoken in the subcontinent.

Cheers.
Pravi   Mon Jan 16, 2006 3:00 pm GMT
Claude,

How do you mean Rough English? Do you mean the pronunciation or the style of speaking or do you mean the usage of grammar in that. I really did not understand what you meant. And also how do you mean escapable reality?

Cheers,
Pravi :)