Does grammar vary at all between say British english and American english, or maybe between Scottish english and Austrailian english? I am curious because essentially it is the same language but it is spoken quite differently. So, if I was to buy a grammar textbook in Britian would it still have the same rules as one in America?
Not too helpful in your place, but I know that in British published books, they don’t put a full-stop (is that what y’all call it?) after abbreviations like Mr, Mrs, or Dr, too.
Mongrel, I think, that besides spelling, some Grammar rules are different. Once a former Jamaican high school English teacher told me that Jamaican students’ final exams are sent to Britain to be checked. I naively asked: “You do not trust American universities or something?” He replied, that they use British grammar in Jamaica.
Sold as bought.
Peace
I know quite a few brits and work with two. Never noticed any contruction differences, just the vocab.
I’ve noticed, especially since I watch British football on TV out here, that British announcers say things like “England are on the attack.” In America “England” would take a singular verb.
I think grammar is where British and American English are the most similar. Vocabulary is different, as has been mentioned, and idioms are different, but a British-penned book should not be grammatically notable to someone raised on American writing. I’ll go further and say it would be difficult to be raised exclusively on American writing; you’re going to run into something British sooner or later if you read on any subject. The level or subject doesn’t matter too much; Encyclopedia Britannica, Nature, A Tale of Two Cities - the words may be unfamiliar, and they colloquialisms may be uncomprehensible (it took me long time to figure out what it meant if something “comes a cropper”), but the grammar should be old hat.
BobT’s observation seems to be true for any group - sports teams, corporations, bands, etc. British treat them as a group of individuals (“Intel are working on a new processor”); Americans treat them as a single entity (“Oakland is going to win the game tonight”). However, Americans still use plural form when referring to teams by name instead of area: “The Jazz aren’t doing so well this year.”
I have observed that when Americans use “would”, “should”, etc. as a verb standing alone (“I don’t want to apologize, but I think I should.”), British put a “do” after it (“I think I should do.”). This is similar to the existing syntax of “I probably should have.”
Scottish grammar is a whole 'nother kettle of fish, as the English spoken there is highly influenced by the Scots language, which is closely related to English but differs in many respects including certain grammatical features. Double modals, for example, are very common: I might could do it. This page has lots more information if you’re interested.
I have noticed the ‘heading’ thing.
Brits: I was heading for the pub.
American: I was headed for the bar.
Odd., I don’t know how it arose but it seems very common.
small point, but UK uses a single ’ for quotes… ‘Hello’ said John, whereas US seem to use double, thus " such as “Howdy Pardner” ahem… sorry for the poor choice of quotes… trouble is, Uk seems to be forgetting that difference due to the high volume of US stuff coming over here. US English is taking over everywhere.
Other than that, hardly any difference.
Brits say ‘Write TO me’
Americans say ‘Write me’
odd… it sounds like an insult.
‘Write me, mofo!’ 
'Taint only Scots; the very same construction is rural Southern in the United States (or should I write “Southron”?). Odd how the northern part of Britain wound up more in evidence in the Southern U.S.
Some other differences:
US: He is bigger than I
UK: He is bigger than me
I realise there is some controversy about whether or not the verb to be takes an object or an auxiliary subject but, by and large, it is the former in the UK and the latter in the US.
US: I could have gotten there earlier if the train hadn’t been late.
UK: I could have got there earlier if the train hadn’t been late.
US: Do you have …? I do.
UK: Have you got …? I have.
Wrong. Totally, unequivocally, wrong.
In American English, the nominative case is never correct after a preposition. Never, ever. No way. You libel Americans by claiming that they accept this solecism. They do not. Even though it’s unfortunately become all too common nowadays.
It’s what is called “hypercorrection.” It results from generations of schoolchildren being corrected if they say “Billy and me want to play ball.” “No, no, Tommy, say ‘Billy and I’”. “Billy and I.” “That’s right.”
The rote repetition of the nominative case gets stuck in the brain from an impressionable age, but the teachers and parents have failed to explain the use of case: where the accusative case is appropriate and where it isn’t.
I wasn’t arguing that it was correct but that it was common.
(Aust/ UK): After doing some maths about sport my brain hurt and I was taken to hospital.
(US): After doing some math about sports my brain hurt and I was taken to the hospital.
What? No one has mentioned the Churchhill quote? 
RE: “are”/“is”. I frequently use “are”, as in “The team are out to lunch.” Not that I’m English; it just makes more sense as “the team” can be replaced by “they”, and “They is out to lunch” doesn’t sound right.
Americans tend to use “their” to refer to a singular: “A person who does that should have their head examined.” “Would everyone please take their seats?” Grammatically, I think it is okay to use “his” even when referring to males and females. Using “his” is less awkward than saying “his or her” or “his/her” “that person’s”. Of course, one could also use “one”.
What? No one has mentioned the Churchhill quote?
RE: “are”/“is”. I frequently use “are”, as in “The team are out to lunch.” Not that I’m English; it just makes more sense as “the team” can be replaced by “they”, and “They is out to lunch” doesn’t sound right.
Americans tend to use “their” to refer to a singular: “A person who does that should have their head examined.” “Would everyone please take their seats?” Grammatically, I think it is okay to use “his” even when referring to males and females. Using “his” is less awkward than saying “his or her” or “his/her” “that person’s”. Of course, one could also use “one”.
Sorry about screwing up the code. :o
So do Brits. It’s a political, rather than a grammatical thing.
Yerwhat? When I was a wee kiddiewink at school we were being taught to use double-dashes for quotes. (In fact we were told to remember ‘66’ and ‘99’). That’s why they are called quotation marks! The inverted comma is used to illustrate, as I did above for ‘66’ and ‘99’, when it is not a quotation.
Oh - and that was in the early 80s.
pan