Originally posted by Scribble
'Offense' is the alternate spelling. 'Offence' is the original spelling of the word. Not that I'm trying to knock you, mate, just getting the facts straight, you know.
No, it isn't. It's not set in stone like that, as an alternative.
Alternate spellings are based on linguistic usage, not "which came first." Where I'm from, the dominant usage is "offense", which makes the alternate spelling "offence."
Both are interchangeable and, where you're from, "offense" may be the alternative. It's semantics, anyway. Both can be used.
Originally posted by The RenegadeShe was speaking from whence all Americans came. Anyway, I erred in correcting her grammar. That's what's important here.
No, it isn't. It's not set in stone like that, as an alternative.Alternate spellings are based on linguistic usage, not "which came first." Where I'm from, the dominant usage is "offense", which makes the alternate spelling "offence."
Both are interchangeable and, where you're from, "offense" may be the alternative. It's semantics, anyway. Both can be used.
BTW: I love your taste in movies. Nice set, man. Right on.
I'd like to thank wrestling for giving me the mental fortitude to make it in life.
Originally posted by The Renegade
No, it isn't. It's not set in stone like that, as an alternative.Alternate spellings are based on linguistic usage, not "which came first." Where I'm from, the dominant usage is "offense", which makes the alternate spelling "offence."
Both are interchangeable and, where you're from, "offense" may be the alternative. It's semantics, anyway. Both can be used.
Originally posted by Scribble
'Alternate' means 'alternative' which basically implies 'other' which implies 'not original'. But I don't know, ****, I'm not even English, I just study the ****ing language. Don't get your knickers in a twist. And open the pod bay doors.
Alternate does not imply that something is not original. It does not carry a value judgment with it necessarily.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Alternate does not imply that something is not original. It does not carry a value judgment with it necessarily.
Originally posted by Bardock42High-functioning ASDs don't develop accents. Of course everyone has an accent.
Your ability to change reality in such a manner that there is a type of talking without accent?
Originally posted by Oneness
High-functioning ASDs don't develop accents. Of course everyone has an accent.
That is not what your link states.
Your link says that a larger number of Autistic children develop their accent by acquiring it from their parents (mother in particular), as opposed to their peers. They still develop and acquire accents however.
At any rate, you initially claimed you had "no accent". Neither the original statement, nor your modified claim hold up.
Originally posted by Scribble
I really don't care about being right, by the way, so if you both want to cheer yourselves up by making some final statements that null what I've said then go right ahead.
That's a good attitude to have. Also to double check information one attains on the Internet.
At any rate, linguistically there is no reason to call modern British English "the original" and other dialects of English, in particular US American English, "the other".
Neither British English nor American English stood still since they separated.