Pedants' Paradise

[french frank]

From the OED on the suffix -ize: " ... in modern French the suffix has become -iser, alike in words from Greek, as baptiser, évangéliser, organiser, and those formed after them from Latin, as civiliser, cicatriser, humaniser. Hence, some have used the spelling -ise in English, as in French, for all these words, and some prefer -ise in words formed in French or English from Latin elements, retaining -ize for those formed < Greek elements. But the suffix itself, whatever the element to which it is added, is in its origin the Greek -ιζειν, Latin -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 [sic]. In this Dictionary the termination is uniformly written -ize."

Fair enough, but I would query the claim: " there is no [sic] reason why in English the special French spelling should be followed, in opposition to that which is at once etymological and phonetic. "

Au contraire, there is NO reason to adopt a 'phonetic' spelling unless you plan to write coff for cough, rain for reign &c. If there was a LL form nasalis that would naturally produce the infinitive *nasalisare > Fr. nasaliser. Whereas what is the justification for declaring the form *nasal-izein to be the 'etymon' since it did not, and could not, have existed?

The 'preferred' spelling of nasalize means no more than that the OED editors prefer it.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The 'preferred' spelling of nasalize means no more than that the OED editors prefer it.

...which is surprising, as usage outside American-speaking countries is negligible.

[Nick Armstrong]

Good news about Cambridge, what?!

Unless I'm mistaken, Bryn's reference back in February went relatively unnoticed...

I can't see that it was picked up in this thread, and certainly didn't see Bryn's post; I have only just caught up with the story:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/council-reverses-ban-on-apostrophes

Wonderful!!

"The local authority claimed it was only following national guidelines that claimed punctuation could confuse emergency services."

[Bryn]

... The 'preferred' spelling of nasalize means no more than that the OED editors prefer it.

Not just Oxford. Cambridge too seems to prefer to avoid the French based "nasalised", as does the Routledge Dictionary pf Language and Linguistics.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Unless I'm mistaken, Bryn's reference back in February went relatively unnoticed...

I can't see that it was picked up in this thread, and certainly didn't see Bryn's post; I have only just caught up with the story:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/council-reverses-ban-on-apostrophes

Wonderful!!

"The local authority claimed it was only following national guidelines that claimed punctuation could confuse emergency services."

Well done, Cambridge. I whether the dimwits in Devon and Brum will follow their lead.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Unless I'm mistaken, Bryn's reference back in February went relatively unnoticed...

I can't see that it was picked up in this thread, and certainly didn't see Bryn's post; I have only just caught up with the story:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/council-reverses-ban-on-apostrophes

Wonderful!!

"The local authority claimed it was only following national guidelines that claimed punctuation could confuse emergency services."

Well done, Cambridge. I whether the dimwits in Devon and Brum will follow their lead.

[french frank]

Not just Oxford. Cambridge too seems to prefer to avoid the French based "nasalised", as does the Routledge Dictionary pf Language and Linguistics.

But the key word is 'prefer'. They may spell it as they 'prefer', as may we all. I prefer nasalise &c.

There are other words, such as connection/connexion, which are alternatives. Neither is wrong. I don't think most people avoid -ise because it's French-based (though, come to think of it, you might: since you keep emphasising the Gallic/French origin). Where would that lead them, linguistically?

[french frank]

Wonderful!!

Pepys' Court? Why? It doesn't belong to Pepys. What about Victoria' Street? Or Albert' Hall? Just because Pepys happens to end in an s, I don't see the need to add an apostrophe. If the name is distinguishing/descriptive rather than possessive, I'd say no apostrophe. FoR3 is a listeners group, not a listeners' group (although Mark corrected my grammar on our homepage ). I'd favour Scholars Walk too, for the same reason.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The notion that -ize is more phonetic is doubtful too. There are thousands of English words using "s" rather than "z".

Internationally Z is not always a buzzing sound. In German it's "ts" and in Spanish it's "th".
Not that this proves anything - it just shows that we shouldn't make assumptions.

[amateur51]

Internationally Z is not always a buzzing sound. In German it's "ts" and in Spanish it's "th".

Unless you're a TV cook using chorizo in which case it's pronounced chor-itso

[french frank]

Unless you're a TV cook using chorizo in which case it's pronounced chor-itso

Half Spanish, half Italian? What's it made of?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

True, but it doesn't buzz.

[amateur51]

Half Spanish, half Italian? What's it made of?

Pork, fat, salt & paprika I imagine.

[Serial_Apologist]

True, but it doesn't buzz.

It hums

[french frank]

Just reading an article on the BBC website (not written by a BBC person) and saw:

"Dependant on the cause ..., it may be best to ..."

Doesn't that combine two separate mistakes? Dependent on the cause/Depending on the cause?