Talk:International English/Archive 1

message: For anyone still dubious about the use of "International English" as a rough synonym for "British English", I have added some primary examples on that as references in the article. They are not academic reference, as this usage is not commonly found, it seems, in academic works or references to ESL (English as a Second Language). But the references do indicate the existance of this usage. Further examples contrasting "International English" with "American English" or "U.S. English" (or North American English) and so equating it with British English follow. They are purposely a mixture of casual postings, announcements, advertisements, and commentary, indicating common use of "International English" to mean approximately "British English" as oppposed to "U.S. English".
The new Microsoft Office 2003 integrations to Microsoft CRM will be available in both American and International English in August. 
Languages Supported: US English, International English, Basque, Simplified Chinese, ... 
</blockquote>
Constant shifts between U.S. and International English spelling could do just that.  (Other examples on this page of this usage.)
Harry Potter was written in English, but in what is known as "British" or "International" English, as opposed to the American English spoken in the United States. 
My site is written in 'International English'. I'm reasonably happy with my keyword ranking (no 1 for one keyword, no 13 for a second). ... Many of my keywords end in '..ise', '..ised', or '..isation'. An American user would be unlikely to find my site, because they would use the American English spellings of '..ize', '..ized', or '..ization' when searching in Google. 
(Choice of video messages in "International English", "American English", and "Spanish".) 
But if somebody contributes a British (rather, international) English variant, what's the problem with maintaining this also? 
I had originally downloaded the international english version, so i figured i should try the north american english version. 
For this reason, only Microsoft Office 97 Professional Edition for Windows is released as a separate "International English" version. All other differences between the U.S. English and the International English versions are behavioral differences that are based on the settings in the Regional Settings control panel for the system.  (Here Microsoft is moving away from earlier software which distinguished only between U.S. English and "International English" meaning essentially British English.)
On balance I would say (as a Brit) that American spellings are on balance slightly less irrational than International English spellings, but I would have problems with American use of prepositions. 
Indeed, word processing and desktop publishing programs generally regard International English as essentially UK English.  (This is now less true than it used to be.)
Unless you insist on proliferating the conventions of each nation, which will surely happen if US standards are imposed here, it makes sense to use w:International English, which includes by the way many British spellings: honour, flavour, neighbour. These too must eventually be standard if we want to be understood all over the world, as that's what people learn in the former British Empire, i.e. most of the planet, and from British journals, e.g. w:The Economist. Likewise we should stick to metric where we can. 
When you write (or type) in English, what 'type' of English do you use? ... British (international) English spellings ... American English spellings .
The Demo version of 4-Sight Fax 4.1.2/3 is available in: * American English (v4.1.3) * International English (v4.1.2) * French/Français (v4.1.2) * German/Deutsch (v4.1.2)  
(Distinctions between "North American English Version" and "International English Version" of Baldur's Gate.) 
Use English (sometimes referred to as British English or International English—since it is generally used throughout the Commonwealth) not American English. 
Only original papers written in English, German or French are considered. Papers written in English should use UK English (that is British or International English) and follow spelling in The Oxford English Dictionary, except for authors in North American institutions, who may use US English if desired. 
 Please note, this site is written in International English, and not U.S. English, and therefore does not contain spelling errors. 
If you chose English, the default idiom will be US English ("color" and "station"). We recommend that you choose International English ("colour" and "chainage"). 
Localization is planned for 14 languages: US English, international English, Japanese, Korean, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Danish, Brazilian Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, traditional Chinese, and simple Chinese. 
All Trials are compiled with the International English Strings - US English and other Languages are available for registered users. 
The OmniGo 100 will be available in six different language versions. The English version of the OmniGo 100 comes in U.S. English and International English versions the latter being distributed in the U.K., Holland, Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand. 
If your business is international, you need to hire writers who know the difference between North American grammar and British grammar; you need to hire writers who know the written difference between International English and US English; .... 
How is the progress on international versions, specifically German, coming along? How long after the release of the US English version do you anticipate releasing other language and international English versions? 
LightWorks GUI Framework provides full support for localisation of all user-interface text and messages, and comes with complete localised resources for International-English, US-English and Japanese languages. 
We use the U.S. English "Kbps" as the abbreviation for "thousands of bits per second." In international English outside the U.S., the equivalent usage is "kbits s-1" or "kbits/s". 
If your English is good enough, aim for British (or international) English. However if your audience is mainly US or Japan, use American English. 
The language used in a PP/ST should not distract or confuse the reader. Constant shifts between U.S. and International English spelling could do just that. ... A special case of refinement is an editorial refinement, where a small change is made in a requirement, i.e. rephrasing a sentence due to adherence to proper English grammar or changing the element to use a consistent spelling convention (U.S. English or International English). This change is not allowed to modify the meaning of the requirement in any way. 
Modern recording technology allows study of spoken English · Influence of overseas forms grows · US and International English dominant. 
The QuarkXPress Passport package contains U.S. English, International English, Danish, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, and Swiss-German. 
Symantec regional product manager Norman Kohlberger said the problem had been noticed with the international English and US English builds of NAV 2004. 
This is really about the differences between American and Standard or International English. ... I am from New Zealand and use Standard English. Most people in the UK, Ireland, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, English-speaking Africa, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, the Indian sub-continent, the Middle East, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Island countries also use Standard English. 
Here's the database in International English ... They switched to American English, and made the following changes: 
As stated in the introduction, we use international English spelling in many parts of POV-Ray for Unix. This means that many words that are normally spelt with a 'z' in American English (such as minimized) are spelt with the English 's' (e.g. minimised).		
I have posted what purport to be the image file patchers for French, German, International English, Dutch, and Danish 9.2.1->9.2.2 updaters to my ftp site (ftp://ftp.gps.caltech.edu/pub/kby). ... Note that the files necessary to make the generated systems non-OpenFirmware runnable haven't been done (the resource file would be the same as North American English, but the data fork patcher probably won't work). 
By the by - In American English, a muckraker is a journalist or an author who searches for and exposes scandals and abuses occurring in business and politics. ... In International English it has a similar root meaning but is highly pejorative. 
You do know that Australia uses International English (sometimes referred to as British English) spellings, rather than American English ones? 
4-Sight Fax is available in American English, International English, French, and German. 
Also the english dictionary is not international english but American english - to have an option of which version would be nice. 
It is important to note that the terminology used in the ICD-10 is international English rather than North American English, and that, as a result, word usage in ICD-10 is not entirely consistent with contemporary North American terminology with respect to functional limitations or depiction of social performance. 
If your English is good enough, aim for British (or international) English. However if your audience is mainly US or Japan, use American English. 
 SmartSuite Millennium Edition Release 9.1 is available in: US English, International English, and Thai. ? SmartSuite Millennium Edition Release 9.0 is available in the following languages: US English, International English, Chinese Simplified (PRC), Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese - Brazilian, Spanish, and Swedish 
 Since this thread is getting on to the meaning of words, can I regret the use of "international" to mean "non-USA", as in "international
editions" of software packages and even "international English edition" applied to versions for use in the UK. ? Surely "international" should refer to matters concerning more than one nation or to the relationships between more than one nation. 
Sametime is available in several languages including: North American English, International English, Brazilian Portuguese, Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, and Spanish, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish. 
Because of its origin within the European Telecommunications Standards Institute, the original OSP drafts used accepted International English spellings. In the final publication, however, ETSI revised the spellings to agree with American English. Because many OSP servers had been built and deployed based on earlier drafts, the client continues to use the original (International) spellings.  
When the translation is into English, it is into international (English) English or American English as specified by the customer. 
US or International English versions of Visio 5.0C 
Autodesk, Inc., the world's leading design software and digital content company, announced the availability of the International English version of Autodesk Building Systems 2005, which offers the Building Systems Bonus Tools that include localized United Kingdom (U.K.) content libraries and U.K. metric dimensional units. 
FileMaker, Inc. has announced that the international English version of FileMaker Developer 5.5 has been released today, and that the US version will be released on October 1st. 
AI is available in American English, Russian and German languages. The next release will add an International English version. 
Jallan 00:30, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please find an authoritative reference — for example, from an academic, a linguist, or a dictionary of International English — that International English is regarded as British English? It is a claim I find somewhat contentious and POV, because it effectively ignores Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, and further implies that British English is one dialect, which also ignores Ireland, Scotland and Wales, not to mention the north of England where the dialect (written and spoken) is very different from the south.  Just to give one example, Scottish schools teach -ize endings (or at least some of them do) in words like "organize." Oxford uses -ize, and I believe Cambridge does (must check this latter). Therefore, it's contentious enough to make the -ise claim about British English, although that's not my concern here. But when you stretch this to cover International English too, the claim becomes almost meaningless. I'm happy to stand corrected by an authoritative source, but not by Microsoft or a Harry Potter fan club. Slim 01:09, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
----
I have not yet found an "authoritative" teritiary reference. 
But I have provided numerous good references indicating that the usage exists, that International English is used as a synonym for British English or Standard English or Commonwealth English or something like that. I say "something like that" because, as you know, and I know, there is not just one dialect involved. However, for literary purposes, publishers who want to tailor the language and spelligns can usually easily get away with two editions: a U.S. English edition and an International English edition, by which is meant essentially a U.S. English edition and a British English edition. For formal literary English, there is little or no difference between traditional BBC British English, literary Irish English, literary South African English, literary Australian English, literary New Zealand English, or literary educated English in India. One edition does for all.
Canada gets either the "U.S. edition" or the "International edition", depending on whim of the publisher or producer or depending on distribution agreements.
I am not supporting this terminology. I am only indicating that it exists, authoritative reference or not.  And yes, it is somewhat meaningless from an academic point of view and a linguistic point of view, in that it does not go far enough, which is why now both Apple and Microsoft now distinguish British English also. But not all software yet does so. Which is why I made the claim about -ise. A company like Xerox produces two manuals, for the same product, one in "U.S. English" ( http://www.office.xerox.com/latest/740DS-02UC.pdf ) and one in what they call "International English" ( http://www.office.xerox.com/latest/740DS-01ED.pdf ) (with -ise endings) which is mostly what you will get, because -ise is more common in British English and still more common in Australian English. Xerox calls it "International English", not me. Quark Express calls British spelling "International English", not me. It is the editors of http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=JournalGuidelines&ProduktNr=223842 Folio Primatologica who say "Papers written in English should use UK English (that is British or International English) and follow spelling in The Oxford English Dictionary, except for authors in North American institutions, who may use US English if desired." (http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=JournalGuidelines&ProduktNr=223842) It is not only Microsoft and a Harry Potter fan (and Microsoft Office has acttually left such binary simplicy behind).
I gather that according to your personal POV, Microsoft should not distinguish between "US English" and "International English" as they do at http://www.certiport.com/portal/desktopdefault.aspx?page=common/pagelibrary/Support_officeSpecialistLogo.htm . You can write to them and tell them that they should use different terminology according to your POV. But since they and others do use "US English" and "International English" in this way, then your personal POV (and my personal POV) should not determine what appears in Wikipedia. Wikipedia should document both usages, because people encounter both usages, one in academic and scholarly and ESL references and the other on some occasions in the publishing industry and in some software.
To say that one of these usages is substandard would be POV. To remove it altogether is far more POV. No particular usage is not being advocated by an article. The article only states that what usages exist and attempts to explain them.
And I'm at loss as to what to make about your comments about -ise. I am well aware of the -ise and -ize usages (apparently more than you are as I have long been aware that Cambridge supports -ise). I was the one who entered the information on the matter in both the British English and Commonwealth English articles, information that many British do not know, because in general British schools teach the -ise endings. However UN and ISO standards use the -ize endings, which means there is indeed, as you indicate, no single British English or "International English" spelling, for those who prefer to use that term (and it is something many British do not know, believing that -ize is mostly American influence.)
Please recognize that NPOV means that varying usages should be recorded in Wikipedia, that a usage should be suppressed altogether because it disagrees with the more common usage found among academics and ESL teachers, which is also the one that is increasingly being found in the computer world also. As to being corrected by Microsoft and a Harry Potter fan, if your suspicion that no-one was using "International English" to mean approximately standard British English incorrect, then it is ad hominem to make any case about how you learned this. Obviously your suspicion was incorrect. You can no longer make that claim. You have now encountered primary references to "International English" being used as a synonym for "British English" or "Commonwealth English" or whatever. 
That there is no good term for the standard literary English of British, Ireland, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand is part of the problem. International English has been taken up by academic for another use. Commonwealth English fits poorly mostly because of Canada. (That Ireland is not part of the Commonwealth does not mean that it could not be described as speaking Commonwealth English.) Standard British English lays too much emphasis on British usage, which is not always the same a elsewhere, especially in idiomatic expressions. So we have different terms for the same concept.
That you had not encountered this usage before makes your original deletion reasonable. But you have encountered the usage now. You know the usage exists. You know that it not limited to just Microsoft and a single Harry Potter fan. So why do you wish to suppress information that others will also encounter or already know about? Even if only Microsoft widely used "International English" in some special way that no-one else did, then it would be right that this article should have a line saying, "As used by Microsoft, it means ....." followed by  whatever distinct meaning Microsoft was using. English usage is not yours to prescribe, unless outside of Wikipeida you can actually persuade others to adopt usage you prefer or refrain from usage you dislike.
Material should not be removed simply because you personally find it POV or contentious. Wikipedia contains much that is POV or contentious.  Such material is supposed to be documented in a NPOV way, not omitted. But documenting such material in a NPOV manner does not change the material itself from being POV or contentious. The claim is not that any particular usage of "International English" is correct or incorrect, only that the usages exist.
MMGB has previously searched for references to "International English" meaning English spoken in the Commonwealth Countries, and had found nothing, probably because he was looking in the wrong places. Use of the term as an approximate synonym to "British English" is mostly not academic or linguistic. But it is an existing usage. So it should appear here, whether a linguist can be found who mentions it or not. As to finding the meaning in dictionaries, so far as I can find, dictionaries contain no entries at all for International English.
Jallan 06:01, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples 

message: You have missed many points, Slim.
1.) You stilll keep insisting that I am identifying British English with International English. I have NEVER done that. The header sentence read:It is also sometimes used in common parlance, mostly by non-Americans, as a cover term for British English and closely related forms of English found outside of the U.S.Read that carefully. Are you misunderstanding it? Would this be clearer:It is also sometimes used with a very different meaning in common parlance, mostly by non-Americans, as a cover term for British English along with the more closely national Englishes found outside of the U.S., opposed to U.S. English.In any case, I have myself never accepted the equation, except in the way one does when one reads material that use different terminology than one uses oneself. Please, stop attributing a claim to me I have never made, and please stop suggesting that I support that usage. I don't. I support documenting its existence.
2.) I already answered you on the point about Tom McArthur using the term "International English". I provided his definition in the article. Why then do you ask again whether he uses it? Are you breaking Wikipedia policy by assuming bad faith on my part? If you think I am lying, then why ask? You could look it up yourself. First you removed Tom McArthur's definition, and then you wonder what International English might mean. The definition you removed says:Basically, it covers the English language at large, often (but not always or necessarily) implicitly seen as standard. It is also certainly commonly used in connection with the acquisition, use, and study of English as the world's lingua franca ('TEIL: Teaching English as an International Language'), and especially when the language is considered as a whole in contrast with American English, British English, South African English, and the like. — McArthur (2002, p. 444–45)The immediately preceding material in the books the header International material followed by:This phrase (with or without a capital i) appears to have developed more or less as a staging post to something else.Then follows the defintion which you removed. Why did you remove it? You may also see McArthur's usage at:McArthur, Tom (2001). "World English and World Englishes: Trends, tensions, varities, and standards", Language Teaching Vol. 34, issue 1. Available in PDF format at Cambridge: Language Teaching: Sample article and Learning and Teacher Support Centre: McArthur.I have already suggested you look there. Search on "International English" and "World English". 
3.) As to Crystal using the term, search in the above reference above. You will find that quotation in a more complete text which shows he was talking about "International English". That is a well-known quotation. Do you really think I would take a quotation from Crystal talking about something else entirely and use it here? I have provided the sources. Why not check them yourself? Why ask me? Why not easily prove I am wrong?
4.) As to Peters, my reference was:— Peters (2004, International English)... that is, look in Peters' work for the year 2004, under the article International English. The work in question, The Cambridge Guide to English Usage is in dictionary or encyclopedia format. You removed the reference to International English yourself. 
5.) I have already answered you on your question of the two approaches. I reproduce the answer again section again:The breakdown into new dialect approach and inclusive approach come from an attempt to boil down McArthur's Oxford Guide to World English, pp. 446–448 into a single summary sentence and also use Pam Peters usage of a mixed British/American set of spelling conventions in The Cambridge Guide to English Usage as an example.McArthur couldn't use it as an example because it came out after his book.
6.) It seems to me that they are arguing exactly the opposite of what Jallan had them saying in the previous version, viz. that international English is basically British English. Of course they are arguing the opposite. That international English is used by some to mean British English and closely related Englishes (not just British English), is an entirely different usage of the term, not at all what people like McArthur, and Crystal, and Peters, and Marko Modiano and others are talking about. That is why this second meaning was in a separate section of the article with a first level header. That was the point of indicating two distinct usages in the header section.
7.) A search on "new dialect" and "International English" does come up with nothing. But try "dialect" and "international English". Almost immediately I came across  with the statement (bolding is mine):The concept of International English is a nebulous one because there is not a community of speakers of this variety – just speakers of regional varieties who happen to meet in an international forum. So it exists only as a slight modification to each particular regional variety. As greater numbers of English speakers divide their lives into home and away zones – by travel, by email, by allegiance to international organisations – perhaps the sense of an international community will grow stronger and the flow‑on in terms of the shaping of an international dialect of English will become more apparent.Or try here , this being one of my references:The alternatives are, therefore, whether linguists should work towards one type of International Standard English for transnational uses (there is no way, however, that use can be restricted to this category because the 'prestige' of such a dialect will be at a premium), or whether International English should become a network of mutually intelligible dialects that systematically enrich and challenge each other through contact.Here are the two approaches laid out by Arjuna Parakrama. I do not know at the moment whether the exact words "new dialect" came to me from some printed source or whether it was my own wording that came in an attempt to compress longer discussion. So change it to internationl dialect following the first exceprt above if you will. Or substitute "World Standard English dialect", except that may require too much explanation about what "World Standard English" means exactly (unless someone wants to write an article on it).
8.) You totally miss the point that someone who doesn't know anything about a topic should not commandeer an article on it and attempt to improve it. You've rendered it unintelligible and then complain that it doesn't make sense.
9.) If you really want "no original research", then stop editing by your idiosyncratic "feelings" that something is bogus. Stop editing by your "suspicions". Do some research yourself and demonstrate that the material in an article is incorrect and so improve it.
Jallan 05:00, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments