Being English, we generally use “colour” as the spelling. But when programming, it is necessary to use “color” as the prior isn’t recognised (or indeed recognized) even in spellcheck.
I’m curious as to why and where these subtle differences in language have appeared from. The use of “s” instead of “z” in the example above, and what other examples of these there are. On a similar note, the use of path and sidewalk - of which, though I say path, sidewalk seems to be such more logical to me. Motorway and freeway being another example of this, as well as Mum and Mom.
Apologies for my general ignorance on the matter. I know I could just search for it, but where’s the fun in that? 
Noah Webster, an American educator of the 19th century, is responsible for many of the changes. He wrote several dictionaries…
Other differences pertain to names for things that did not exist before English speakers moved to this continent & began “corrupting” the language. The different populations created or reused different words. Over here, path is a winding walkway through the countryside or a park; a sidewalk is a paved walkway running parallel to a paved street. In that case, sidewalk seems to make sense.
I remember when “glove compartment” was the standard for that little box in a car/auto/whatever; “glove box” was UK usage. Glove Box has become more popular here–probably because it’s shorter. (But who keeps gloves there?)
It is worth noting that it isn’t just a case of the USA corrupting the language whilst the Brits kept it pure. **Both **dialects/variants of English developed and changed, somewhat independently of each other - some words dropped out of use on either side, but were retained on the other (gotten, for example, was once common usage in Britain).
In other cases, there may have been multiple loosely-standardised spellings for something at the time of divergence (Aluminium/Aluminum, for example) - we plumped for one of them in Britain, whilst the other became standard in the USA.
The “-re” to “-er” change of endings was mentioned. There’s also “-ce” to “-se”, another one of Webster’s ideas.
Personally, I kind of wish “tung” had caught on better.
I find myself trying to fathom why it was necessary in the first place? Language will always change over time, that’s a given, but there you go! I find it intriguing the way different locations twist language. Not even a worldwide scale, but traveling out from Yorkshire and having someone refer to something like a bread-bun as a cob, or bap was confusing to me. I remember the confusion of my girlfriend’s grandparents who are nowhere near to Yorkshire when i asked them to “put wood in 'ole” …i wonder whether they thought i was referring to something very much “off-topic”.
I’m presuming this is in reference to the “Tung or Tong” debate?
If so, then I am in complete agreement!
Language isn’t “twisted”, which implies some objective standard to be measured against. People talk the way they do, and it’s only recent in our evolutionary history that we’ve had to be understood by people outside our immediate surroundings.
By twisted i meant changed. Though i do understand what you mean 
At one time there was no standard, people wrote what they heard. I have a book called “The Lisle Letters” of snail mail written in the 1500’s. (Lord Lisle was one of the last Plataganets, and HenryVIII’s spies kept and categorized his mail to see if he was a threat to the king.) Not only is the spelling totally erratic, but the same person might spell the same word differently in the course of a single letter. The number of variations in spelling “Lisle” is incredible. You thought British accents were odd, try writing the way each one sounds it out. Then add foreign accents…
Basically, I assume that until someone asserted central control and said “this is the rght way”, it was every man for himself as far as spelling went. If Americans got Webster’s book to tell them how, and Brits got some different book, then that explains part of it.
A lot of word use is colloquial or historical. The bonnet/hood, gas/petrol and trunk/boot were common things remarked on when I was growing up. Corn/maize is another. Of course english by itself is illogical - the old joke that we park on the driveway and drive on the parkway.
Then there’s historical obsolete use. We still watch “films” even though it’s likely digital or disk. We dial a number even though half the population has never used a dial.
Webster’s spelling reforms weren’t really necessary, of course. His dictionary was entirely his own initiative. But, he happened to come along when the United States was a new country, when universal education was taking off, and when Americans were eager to distinguish themselves from Britain. Webster’s dictionary was a hit, and many of his proposals were adopted.
Later attempts at spelling reform have never had that kind of luck. The Chicago Tribune tried for years to get Americans (or Chicago residents anyway) to use “tho” for “though” and the like. But it didn’t take, and they eventually gave it up.
Sorry, I was referring to Webster’s proposal that “tongue” be spelled “tung”. That’s a word I always hesitate over, and it never looks right to me anyway.
Though Webster did some of it, Teddy Roosevelt was responsible for many of the changes, when he approvedthis listto be used by government agencies in 1906. Note the number of -our to -or changes, and the -re to -er.
If “tongue” indeed was spelt “tung”, then at the very least it would end the pronunciation feud.:smack:
Now the -our to -or changes make sense, but is there any basis to the -re to -er? Or is that purely to do with phonetics?
Ah. Perhaps there’s something I’m unaware of. Do Britons pronounce “tongue” to rhyme with “long” and “gong”?
That is the whole tung/tong thing. The latter being the one you are referring to. It purely depends on where you are, and who brought you up. For me and the area I have been brought up in, it’s “tung” but my girlfriend for example and all her family pronounce it “tong”. This, being most commonly perceived as the posh way of saying it. Then there’s the scone pronunciation one… My my.
Some northern English accents do pronounce it more like ‘tong’ than ‘tung’ (Merseyside, I think), others pronounce it more like ‘toong’ (and in the south, it’s generally ‘tung’)
How do you know the other folks are the ones who changed?
But in that region, are other “u” words (e.g. “sun” and “cut”) pronounced with the same “oo” sound? If so, then those people might agree the word could be spelled “tung”. It’s just that they pronounce all their u’s funny.
True.
“Path” means that in Britain too. (Although it does not have to be winding. Does a path really have to be winding in America?) In the British English I grew up speaking, the equivalent to the American “sidewalk” is “pavement”.
I don’t think we Brits have a single word for what Americans call “pavement.” We would have to say something like “road surface.”
I’m meaning that language changes via location. Twisted being and example of that - here, the use of twisted meaning changed.