-
Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!
-
It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here
Peter's new avatar
- Thread starter Katie Bee
- Start date
jorghes
LostCousins Superstar
The "icky" feeling you get with screenshotted is probably because "shot" is already past tense (of "shoot"); which would suggest to your brain that "screenshot" doesn't require a second past tense marker in the "-ed".
Almost like saying something like "went-ed".
The definition that I found using Google* was the one from Merriam-Webster, the oldest dictionary company in the US. According to their entry, screenshot as a verb only dates back to 1995, but - before anyone gets too excited - it's use as a noun only dates back to 1983, and nobody I know complains about that use of the word.
* when I say I found something using Google I'm not necessarily referring to the first result (or, in the case of definitions, the one that Google highlights); apart from anything else, what comes top when I search may not be what comes top when you search
* when I say I found something using Google I'm not necessarily referring to the first result (or, in the case of definitions, the one that Google highlights); apart from anything else, what comes top when I search may not be what comes top when you search
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
I don’t tend to refer much to American dictionaries as British English and American English can be quite different in terms of usage, meanings and spellings.
The OED, its entry updated in March 2022, lists screenshot only as a noun. It says that it first appeared (as a computer term) as two separate words in 1983, and as a single word in 1985. No doubt screenshot will eventually be accepted as a verb by the OED, but it isn’t yet.
When it comes to technology American spelling tends to be the lingua franca - hence program rather than the English programme.
It's worth bearing in mind that where American spelling differs from ours it's often more authentic, for example in the use of 'z' where we tend to prefer 's'. Also the spelling 'laborer' is found in older parish registers.
J
JoyNor
Guest
Many definitions of "screenshotted" are given if you Google. Including an Urban Dictionary take on the word.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
All sorts of spellings appear in old registers, and without any consistency between registers and clerks, and these can't really be used as examples of "authentic" spelling.
There are variations in spelling, of course - it wasn't considered important, even by most educated people. But I'd be surprised if a random sample of registers from the 18th century failed to support my proposition.
Bob Spiers
LostCousins Superstar
I have refrained from commenting apart from finding the word 'screenshotted' an awful word and amazed that anyone would use same, when they could have made clear of the past tense by merely rephrasing (e.g.) ..."I used a screenshot".
However on the subject of lingua franca how about lingua anglais and the word connexion which is regarded as an alternative (and therefore correct) English spelling of connection. I recall being picked up for typing the word as connection when working in a clerical role in the RAF... by a Group Captain no less. If you think it brave to challenge Peter on his choice of words it pales into insignificance at my bravery at telling a very senior officer that connexion was NOT a correct spelling. He insisted it was correct and (albeit reluctantly) agreed my version as a 'secondary' spelling form. However, he wanted it to be spelled as connexion and I was to remember it in future. I think at the time I put it down to him being a Scot, but am sure that had nothing to do with it. Nevertheless, I spent time afterwards speaking with lesser mortals (Sergeants, Corporals et al) and they all agreed on the spelling as Connection.
In all later years I have only come across one other who spelled it with an 'x' and she was Canadian and told me she thought that was how the 'Brits' spelled the word...unlike the 'Yanks' who spell it connection.
However on the subject of lingua franca how about lingua anglais and the word connexion which is regarded as an alternative (and therefore correct) English spelling of connection. I recall being picked up for typing the word as connection when working in a clerical role in the RAF... by a Group Captain no less. If you think it brave to challenge Peter on his choice of words it pales into insignificance at my bravery at telling a very senior officer that connexion was NOT a correct spelling. He insisted it was correct and (albeit reluctantly) agreed my version as a 'secondary' spelling form. However, he wanted it to be spelled as connexion and I was to remember it in future. I think at the time I put it down to him being a Scot, but am sure that had nothing to do with it. Nevertheless, I spent time afterwards speaking with lesser mortals (Sergeants, Corporals et al) and they all agreed on the spelling as Connection.
In all later years I have only come across one other who spelled it with an 'x' and she was Canadian and told me she thought that was how the 'Brits' spelled the word...unlike the 'Yanks' who spell it connection.
Last edited:
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
You might find it difficult to find many 18th century registers which actually give occupations. In the course of this morning's research I have so far looked in only one register (out of a dozen or more) which gave occupations, for a brief period in the middle of the 18th century, and the spelling used there was either labourer or lab:
If you look in the OED you will see that the 'our' version dates back to at least the 1300s and is the older spelling. Words like error were also previously spelt errour. It is actually something of a myth that American spellings often have older derivations and are thus more authentic.
The spelling of most English words has changed several times since mediaeval times, for a whole variety of reasons; in some cases the meaning also changed. When I talked about American spellings being more authentic I wasn't suggesting that they were older - if I had meant that I would have said so.
Spelling tended to simplified over the years, as the change from errour to error demonstrates; scribes and printers had an incentive to be economical (scribes in particular also used many abbreviations). American spelling is both more modern and more authentic than English spelling - not because it was simplified by the Americans, but because our language was complicated by pedantic Victorians (who also invented a load of fussy grammatical rules, some of which are at last being ditched).
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
I'm afraid I'm at a loss to understand why you consider spellings standardised by Webster in 18th century America as more 'authentic' than those used consistently - and standardised - in England from much earlier times. While spellings varied enormously between individuals and in different regions in the early modern period, there is no evidence that the our spelling of words like labour and colour (for example) ever dropped out of use in England, or that it was in some way reintroduced by the Victorians.
What did happen from the Victorian era onwards is that people started to consider that spelling mattered, and thus to adopt existing standardised spellings as the correct version.
An economical use of text in older documents was achieved by using colons, superscripts, runes and contraction marks, not by by simplifying the spellings.
What did happen from the Victorian era onwards is that people started to consider that spelling mattered, and thus to adopt existing standardised spellings as the correct version.
An economical use of text in older documents was achieved by using colons, superscripts, runes and contraction marks, not by by simplifying the spellings.
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
Looking at 18th century PCC wills indexed at TNA, doing a keyword search on laborer gets 11 results, whereas searching on labourer gets 698. Between 1500 and 1599 there are 18 results for laborer and only 11 for labourer, but overall there are significantly more wills using the spelling labourer.
(A random check of the actual wills suggests the spelling given in the index accurately reflects the original.)
(A random check of the actual wills suggests the spelling given in the index accurately reflects the original.)
Susan48
LostCousins Superstar
Perhaps Peter would be kind enough to give some examples of these.
Please see this Guardian article (free to view).
Bear in mind that they're not originals, they are copies. I don't know how many clerks were employed, or how they were trained, but the registered copies might not be a very random sample of 18th century spelling.
A
At home in NZ
Guest
Yawn.
I didn't ask you to read it, though I'm surprised that anyone who professes an interest in the English language could find it boring.
jorghes
LostCousins Superstar
They started to standardise the spelling when Caxton invented the printing press in 1476. It was completely adhoc and in some ways they then corrupted the spelling to make it look "better". For example the English term "dettis" became "debts" to make it look more Latin-esque. But it has been a work in progress since. People also added 'e's where some didn't exist as well... What makes pronunciation so difficult is that they had pretty much standardised the spelling prior to the last shift in phonological sounds, so they no longer match what is written.
The USA is an unique case, some of the spellings it uses are new-ish - such as removing all the "-our" spellings in words such as colour/color and labour/labor, however the British version has removed some of them too, such as "doctour". American English has even preserved some older words that British English has dispensed with.
As the Guardian article highlights - in the end the only truth of English is that if there is a rule, it can be bent, and in some cases, completely broken.
If you're really interested in the tug of war between American English and UK English, then I recommended the The Prodigal Tongue by Lynne Murphy. There are some small snippets on the website if you don't want to read the actual book.
Last edited by a moderator:
