Wait. I don't agree with that. I am fine with our members from Commonwealth nations using Commonwealth spellings in their posts. What I am tired of is flogging the spelling issue. I do think the Americans should use the recommended spelling of NIST SP330 and US GPO Style Manual.
If both spellings are acceptable, there is really nothing to debate, is there? (he asks rhetorically) ________________________________ From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, January 29, 2011 2:13:11 PM Subject: [USMA:49680] Re: [SI] A mole hill into Himalaya Agreed! Let's drop the subject of spelling *concurrent* with proper respect for well established laws and practices in the USA which *do not contradict SI*; which include USMA Web Pages. Please cease and desist addressing messages to the USMA which deviate from the official USA spellings (US Government Printing Office) meter and liter. Gene. ---- Original message ---- >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:43:28 -0600 >From: "Paul Trusten" <[email protected]> >Subject: [USMA:49678] Re: [SI] A mole hill into Himalaya >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > I agree with you, Stan. Actually, it is difficult > to get much of the world, let alone the U.S., to use > the correct SI symbols, let along some kind of > standardized spelling, for unit names. For me, it > is the use of the established symbols that must > remain the same in all languages. I'm not tooting my > own horn, but merely stating fact, that the > pharmaceutical industry seems to be the > most consistent user of correct SI symbolism on its > product labels. It's afte the drug leaves the stock > packaging that things go down hill. > > I shall not hold it against my fellow citizens of > they write meter instead of metre. This spelling > convention never made it into U.S. English. It is > reflected in the spelling of other words, such as > center vs. centre, or theater vs. theatre. There > are other spellings that became part of U.S. usage, > such as -or (U.S.) vs. -our (other countries) > (colour, flavour, valour). In some words of > science, we have sulfate vs. sulphate, and diarrhea > vs. diarrhoea. I do use, and support, the > pronunciation of KILL-oh-mee-ter because it is a > logical extension of the pronunciation of unit names > with SI prefixes. But, that's just I. > > As for me, I am done posting anything about this > again,. It is a little known codicil in the mission > of USMA that we exist to > > Unite the efforts of all individuals and > organizations interested in promoting the metric > system. > > Let's drop all the trivia, stand together for world > metrication, and keep our eyes on that prize! > > (A mole into a Himalaya is right!) > > Paul > > Paul Trusten, R.Ph. , Vice President > U.S. Metric Association, Inc. > www.metric.org > [email protected] > +1(432)528-8824 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stanislav Jakuba > To: [email protected] > Sent: 29 January, 2011 08:38 > Subject: [SI] A mole hill into Himalaya > > I cannot but show my discomfiture at the enduring > importance given to this –er –re non-issue. > Americans must be the laughing stock of anyone who > speaks other languages. None have this > “problem.” European languages, except English, > are (more or less) phonetic, and many other > languages do not bather writing vowels in the > first place, let along the silent ones like the > irritating “e.” This debate is an American > specialty as other English speaking countries > including such as India use –re or do not care. > Slavic languages, for example, have 6 or 7 ways to > spell the name. This smear on American reputation > as a get-things-done-country could be ignored if > it was not one of the reasons for the failure of > the Metric Board to get the changeover going back > in the 1970s. That mole hill issue on the > Himalayan scale of metricating a country should > have been treated as follows: > > > > “Mr. Chairman, I would like us to decide the > issue of spelling …” > > A reply: > > “Mr. Irritant, you or anyone else can spell it > anyway you want. Let’s move to the next item on > the agenda - a review of the report on structural > steel sizes and deadlines the steal industry > propose.” > > (A subcommittee reports.) > > Etc. > > > > It is a reflection on the poor quality of the > Board members that they would let themselves be > occupied by such a triviality. It is also a > reflection on this Forum, that there are people on > it still insisting on spelling one way or another > knowing well what harm treating that issue as Y/N > caused. As if there were no other words in the > American English that can be spelled more than one > way. > > Stan Jakuba
