# American English in Harry Potter? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 7, 2004, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687 "2004-04-07T04:19:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/21 "2004-04-08T04:37:24Z")
Another thing that got me was the students buying their books for school-do kids in the UK really have to buy their own textbooks? ---
**Author:** ![Legolamb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4491bb/32.png) [@Legolamb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Legolamb)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/22 "2004-04-08T05:23:15Z")
> [@bmoak](#): > > Balaclava in place of ski mask is the only Britishism that threw me in the U.K. editions. Why is called that, anyway? I think it has something to do with the Crimean War. I’m pretty sure Balaklava was the location of the Charge of the Light Brigade. More than that I couldn’t say and I didn’t turn much up with a quick Google search either. ---
**Author:** ![curly\_chick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7ba0ec/32.png) [@curly\_chick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curly_chick)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 7:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/23 "2004-04-08T07:58:00Z")
> [@Tiramisu](#): > > I highly doubt Harry was reading his spellbooks under his covers with a “flamy fire stick”. You will note I said in Harry Potter’s wizardy world before that. When he was at the Dursley’s house, reading his books under the bedclothes, then yes, you’re right, of course, in your version he would have a flashlight whereas in mine it would be a torch. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/24 "2004-04-08T13:03:54Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > The bizarre thing is that it was almost certainly a waste of time and money. British children’s books have been popular in the USA for a century or more and so far as I’m aware this silly translation thing is a recent innovation. It’s not just children’s books that get this treatment. IIRC, the _Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy_ series had some alterations made for the American edition, and I’m sure the same has been done to many other British books. I remember reading in a magazine article about the _Harry Potter_ books that they were especially challenging for the British-to-American “translators” because there are so many wizard words (“Spellotape”) that are based on British terms (“cellotape”). They decided to leave most of these alone and focused their attention on Muggle terms. With few exceptions, I also find this annoying. However, when it comes to slangier Britishisms that are unlikely to appear in American dictionaries, or words that have different meanings in the US and UK but context is not enough to make this clear, change is justifiable. I’m against dumbing things down, but I’m also against making things needlessly confusing – especially for kids. For instance, in the American Edition of _Order of the Phoenix_, the Weasley twins remark that they were able to “keep our spirits up” during exams. In the British edition, they say “keep our peckers up”. I doubt many Americans are familiar with this British expression, and possible that a couple of boys in their late teens really might use it in the American sense (“we were able to achieve/maintain erections”) in the same context. But that’s a bit racy for a children’s book! Had it been left alone it would have shocked more than a few readers, and some of them surely would have made a fuss about it. So it was a smart business move for the publishers to tweak that one. If changing a single word can clarify the author’s intended meaning while avoiding embarassing misunderstandings then I think it’s reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/25 "2004-04-08T15:08:46Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > It is also interesting to note that many American children’s books will contain older words or phrases which are not familiar to today’s youth. The Hardy Boys will use words such as “chum” or “jalopy” which are not part of the vocabulary of the average 4th grader. 1. Hardy Boys books _do_ get updated from time to time - precisely for that reason (although the back cover will say something like “Mr. Dixon has included the latest crime-solving techniques”). I have a 1930’s “Hidden Harbor” where they are in a car (roadster) chase that got up to 35 - then 45 miles an hour! It also has the boys interviewing a _former slave_ about the history of the harbor. 2. No fourth graders I know (and I have one, and he has lots of friends) would pick up a Hardy Boys book. It’s Harry Potter, Redwall, Series of Unfortunate Events, Shakespeare Stealer, Thief Lord, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Dung\_Beetle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dung_beetle/32/7945_2.png) [@Dung\_Beetle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dung_Beetle)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/26 "2004-04-09T12:17:56Z")
> [@](#): > > In the British edition, they say “keep our peckers up”. **Lamia** , are you saying that in England this phrase has never had anything to do with the penis? And if so, what the heck _is_ a pecker? ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/27 "2004-04-09T13:04:33Z")
> [@Dung Beetle](#): > > **Lamia** , are you saying that in England this phrase has never had anything to do with the penis? Never? Beats me. You’d have to ask a Brit that one and not just an Anglophile. 😉 But in this particular instance, that’s not the intended meaning. > [@](#): > > - > > And if so, what the heck _is_ a pecker?\* In this sense it means…well, “spirits”, pretty much, or “courage”. To make a WAG, this may be similar to “keep our chins up”, with “pecker” meant to suggest to the mouth/nose by evoking the image of a bird’s beak (what it “pecks” with), but I don’t really know the origin of the expression. ---
**Author:** ![audreyayn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@audreyayn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/audreyayn)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/28 "2004-04-09T13:33:46Z")
> [@r\_k](#): > > WTF? Did they just throw in a token black (sorry, Black :rolleyes:) character? Just for the hell of it? Did that make them feel better? No, IIRC Thomas Dean shows up multiple times as a background character. It was a mistake that left him out of the sorting list, but since the American version comes out later, it could be corrected. ---
**Author:** ![Asylum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@Asylum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asylum)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/29 "2004-04-09T18:57:09Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > The Hardy Boys will use words such as “chum” or “jalopy” which are not part of the vocabulary of the average 4th grader. Does “chum” have a different meaning than fishing bait? I was reading a Hardy Boys book and the brothers went fishing, and when Jow called Frank “chum” I thought “Yeep! There’s gonna be some fratricide and a coverup!” and immediately put down the book because I was so disturbed. Should I finish reading it? ---
**Author:** ![Dung\_Beetle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dung_beetle/32/7945_2.png) [@Dung\_Beetle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dung_Beetle)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/30 "2004-04-09T19:07:58Z")
**Asylum** , posts like that are one of the reasons I come here. For some reason, that made me happy. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/31 "2004-04-09T19:08:56Z")
“Chum” means buddy. You should be able to pick that up from watching vintage Batman episodes. 🙂 It really is very vintage vocab. ---
**Author:** ![audreyayn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@audreyayn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/audreyayn)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/32 "2004-04-09T20:04:09Z")
Not so vintage. From the Simpsons episode where Bart sells his soul: Bart to Millhouse: “Nice doing business with ya, chummmmmmmmmmmm … p.” ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/33 "2004-04-09T23:42:40Z")
Anyone who says it’s a good idea to change Britishisms to Americansims because kids might find it confusing… well nobody seems to care about changing Americanisms into Britishisms, so the rest of the world (including kids) just has to leasrn from context what the hell you guys are talking about half the time. If we can figure it out as kids, then so can the US kids. In fact I encourage it, so they will learn some fascinating cultural facts about the world, as well as where to go to look some of it up, if need be. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/34 "2004-04-10T01:07:44Z")
> [@curly chick](#): > > You will note I said in Harry Potter’s wizardy world before that. > > When he was at the Dursley’s house, reading his books under the bedclothes, then yes, you’re right, of course, in your version he would have a flashlight whereas in mine it would be a torch. [geek mode=“on”] Electrically-powered devices like a battery-powered light source wouldn’t work at Hogworts. Remember, Harry wouldn’t be able to summon a scuba tank to rescue Ron during the Triwizard Tournament, and Draco Malfoy was definitely not communicating on a walkie-talkie. (Though I admit the failure of the scuba tank thing perplexes me; surely an underwater device such as that isn’t exactly _electrical_.) I can’t remember precisely if Harry ever uses a flashy-burny-drippy-handheld-fire torch in the wizarding world, especially when he could just wave his wand and say _lemons!_ or whatever it is. [/geek] ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/35 "2004-04-10T01:31:25Z")
> [@Fish](#): > > [geek mode=“on”] > Electrically-powered devices like a battery-powered light source wouldn’t work at Hogworts. Remember, Harry wouldn’t be able to summon a scuba tank to rescue Ron during the Triwizard Tournament, and Draco Malfoy was definitely not communicating on a walkie-talkie. (Though I admit the failure of the scuba tank thing perplexes me; surely an underwater device such as that isn’t exactly _electrical_.) > > I can’t remember precisely if Harry ever uses a flashy-burny-drippy-handheld-fire torch in the wizarding world, especially when he could just wave his wand and say _lemons!_ or whatever it is. > [/geek] You know, someday, I would really like a better explanation of why electronics and batteries and such doesn’t work other than “the world is just set up that way.” What the heck is going on with magic that it manages to screw up electromagnetism and basic chemical reactions? Every time I hit that, my suspension of disbelief goes away for a little while. ---
**Author:** ![TJdude825](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dec6dc/32.png) [@TJdude825](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TJdude825)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/36 "2004-04-10T03:16:18Z")
“Lumos” I assume it’s Latin… ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/37 "2004-04-10T04:26:55Z")
> [@Shoshana](#): > > Are you reading US or British editions? My US edition of \*HP & the Sorcerer’s Stone \* says on p. 4: “…to buy himself a bun from the bakery,” whereas my British edition of _HP & the Philosopher’s Stone,_ p. 9, gives “…to buy himself a bun from the baker’s opposite.” What the hell is a baker’s opposite? An anti-baker? And if so, shouldn’t he be buying an anti-bun? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/38 "2004-04-10T04:56:37Z")
Ooh, is that where you get antipasta, too? And strange though it may seem, I actually don’t have a problem with technology not working around Hogwarts. It’s totally illogical, but somehow it just… works. ---
**Author:** ![StephenG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@StephenG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StephenG)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/39 "2004-04-10T05:08:19Z")
I suspect “the baker’s opposite” is “the baker opposite of Harry” (not "the opposite of the baker), or, the baker across the street. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687/40 "2004-04-10T05:47:55Z")
If the baker touches his opposite, do they explode? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-english-in-harry-potter/238687.md?page=3)