I have an English Language A-Level, not the most glamorous qualification but I learnt (despite both being correct, it's more commonly used in UK than 'learned', which by your standards is important so I suggest you correct yourself) that -ize is standard by OED definitions. I use -ise out of habit and because I don't give a toss for extreme levels of pedantry. Also shouldn't you say "you don't even know which is correct"? Nah, I'm sure you know.
Frankly, at the moment, I don't give a monkey's, whether you have A-level English or not, as I'm sure you wouldn't respect my qualifications either, from this distance. I reserve the right to have my bad mood and be as pedantic as I bloody well choose. I'm usually as mild as milk, whereas others have been almost bi-polar, in the past. I'm having my go, this time, and if you want to criticise it, then you have the right. In my defence, I'll correctly point out that I have the right, too.
You certainly do have the right. I'm just pointing out that if you're going to be pedantic, you might as well do a good and fair job of it, and not open yourself up to criticism by making mistakes yourself. I simply pointed out that I have a qualification (albeit a minor one) as a rebuttal to your insinuation that I relied upon looking things up on the spot for my knowledge, which I don't see as a problem anyway - isn't that how people learn?
I see we have moved from discussing Saints defence to discussing how to spell 'defence' via discussing Kate's boobs! Interesting thread.
Doesn't matter what the OED says. That just panders to the people who can't speak English i.e. Americans It is defence not defense. licence not license. It is ise and not ize (except the few that are the other way round. lol) And Chav was a friendly greeting in many places of the UK well before the OED decided to include it as a derogatory term. The OED is for Dinlows with big blurts
ImpsSaint's argument for -ise over -ize: "the OED is for dinlows with big blurts" A compelling case, but I prefer rational arguments. The OED's explanation: "n mod.F. the suffix has become -iser, alike in words from Greek, as baptiser, évangéliser, organiser, and those formed after them from L., as civiliser, cicatriser, humaniser. Hence, some have used the spelling -ise in Eng., as in French, for all these words, and some prefer -ise in words formed in French or Eng. from L. elements, retaining -ize for those of Gr. composition. But the suffix itself, whatever the element to which it is added, is in its origin the Gr. -ιζειν, L. -izāre; and, as the pronunciation is also with z, there is no reason why in English the special French spelling should be followed, in opposition to that which is at once etymological and phonetic. In this Dictionary the termination is uniformly written -ize. (In the Gr. -ιζ-, the i was short, so originally in L., but the double consonant z (= dz, ts) made the syllable long; when the z became a simple consonant, (-idz) became īz, whence Eng. (-aɪz).)" Think they might have just explained it pretty well. And yes, TSS, I did have to look that up, I've sadly not memorised (memorized) the quote. I suppose that makes my knowledge invalid. Regardless, the point is, it really doesn't matter. I use -ise despite being non-standard by OED definitions because nobody really gives a ****, except people who are particularly pedantic. Therefore when someone (TSS, in this case) tries to play King Pedantry, it's only fair to provide an alternative, more valid viewpoint as an attempt to downplay said pedantry. Truth is, as long as you can understand what someone's saying, spelling (especially in matters so trivial as defence/defense) really doesn't matter. In a job application, maybe, but nobody's going to hire you based on ****ing Not606 posts. If you have to be pedantic, do a good job of it rather than "this is what I think is right therefore it must be right ignore my other errors because I'm right".
What I mean is you are saying that is doesn't matter if you can understand what people are saying. and those words above (especially chav) are used very frequently around these parts, yet you wouldn't understand them. Pompey folks will know what Dinlow means, maybe know what the other 2 words meant before modern adoption of them, however they ain't<---- in the OED which means that you can't understand them.......Sad innit mon
When did people start using someone's grasp of spelling (or lack thereof) as a weapon during an argument?
So what are you upset about? That words no longer mean the same as they once did? You realise (realize) that there are a whole load of words that are used in modern English that had completely different meanings in the past, do you dislike those as well?
I don't usually mind at all but defense is a shocker. mos def american. ise/ize doesn't bother me at all. Not many people know the few that are actually ize in English spelling (pre acceptance of Americanized spelling.)
Since TSS claimed " I will measure the validity of someone's opinion by the clues I get in their text", meaning your opinion counts for less if your use of language doesn't conform to his (sometimes non-standard but self-appointed) rulings.
Yes if Joe takes offence when I used the word Chav the other day to describe 'lads' then it surely is a problem because I used it to mean lads not yobs. That is my understanding of the word chav however I did play devil's ad when he did take offence and play on the modern meaning a little which was foolish. What I mean is that while people accept the OED evolving then the language gets confused and not all encompassing. I also hate the red lines under the words I type when I know I have spelt them correctly. lol EDIT: spelt has a red line under it WTF.
I think most assumed you were using chav with negative connotations because of context. Language used by youths is best avoided as an anomaly - most of the time I have no idea whether "wicked" and "sick" are good things or bad things. By no means is the OED the definitive authority (as there isn't a definitive authority) but its explanation and justification to using -ize over -ise is far more convincing than "er I was told it's right, so, it is" which most people choose to live by (including myself!)
chav isn't used by youths though, at least not round here. It is the older generation round here that use it all the time in its 'greeting' form. Kudos to you though. One of the few that knows which its/it's is right. lol You might find this amusing. This is the 'Newark Slang' dictionary. Most Lincolnians know a few of the words because Newark is only 13 miles down the road so we encounter it a lot and 'chav' being a greeting is very very commonly used. Romany Gypsy speak which is why the Pompey folks will encounter it as well: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/7262287/A-Guide-To-Speaking-Newark-Slang
That's not the point. Over many many centuries it moves into local language. That's my point. Like my Pompey suporting Dad from Winchester says 'Move yer Arris' Arris being the Gypsy slang for Arse. He is not a gypsy BTW. lol
