zurnal24 Forumzurnal24.info
   
 
Forum / General Talk46

US vs. UK English--the real differences


OP pheelyks  
Jul 04, 2009 | #41
That would be "dost," if I'm not mistaken, OR.
OxbridgeResearchers 6 | 740 ☆☆  
Jul 04, 2009 | #42
God's eye! Verily, I hath been sorely shamed :) Methinks Voldemort shalt revel in my shame!
WritersBeware  
Jul 04, 2009 | #43
Yes you are right that Ukranianexpert is fake because in another thread, she has been indentified as WB...

The member, Ukranianexpert, already OPENLY ADMITTED her identity. As I previously stated, the posts by Ukranianexpert had absolutely nothing to do with me. That does not stop the all-star moron from posting roughly its 143rd lie.

Moderator, when all legit members disappear and move to a new forum, you will have chacha and your inaction to thank. The fact that you do not explain your inaction is a slap in the face to long-time members who have contributed so much to this forum.

So does I....

Are you freaking kidding me?
exwriter 4 | 251  
Jul 05, 2009 | #44
is Barclay Littlewood a barrister or not? He insists that he is and even proclaimed it out loud on BBC - everybody else says he isn't! So, do you have any info?

He passed his bar exams but never attained pupillage so therefore CANNOT practise as a barrister. He would have needed to do pupillage in order to practice, and if pupillage is not undertaken within 7 years of practice the certificate used to become invalid requiring the person to retake the exam again before they can enter pupillage. That has only changed in recent years, so the certificate now lasts indefinetly until pupillage is completed. However, since He does not fit into this category, his certificate will have expired thereby meaning that, should he ever decide to become a barrister in the future he would have to retake the exams first.
OxbridgeResearchers 6 | 740 ☆☆  
Jul 05, 2009 | #45
He passed his bar exams but never attained pupillage so therefore CANNOT practise as a barrister

I see. Thanks for clearing it up :)
Smiley73 3 | 353 ☆☆  
Nov 09, 2017 | #46
I think that one of the differences has to do with the history of the English language itself. The British version has a more archaic approach to its spelling, wording, and presentation while the American version is simply straight to the point. The Britons seem to prefer a roundabout method of discussion for some reason. Sure the everyday terms used may be as different as night and day, but that is when it comes to general English references. As far as academic writing is concerned, the spelling and presentation is where the differences come in. Aside from that, the British sources of information are a bit harder to come by for a US based writer. In my experience, the UK research papers prefer to not have American references included in the research as much as possible. I have had clients before ask me to limit the reference to US research without offering a clear explanation as to why that limitation was in place. I think it has to do with the history of the two countries as well. I believe it was Prince Charles who made a reference to America not having spoken "proper" English in centuries or since its emancipation from the British empire.



Forum / General Talk / US vs. UK English--the real differences

Need Help? ➰
CLOSE
THE BEST FREELANCE WRITERS [4]:
Legitimate Academic Freelance Writers!
THE BEST WRITING SERVICES [5]:
Legitimate Academic Research Services!

RECOMMENDED SERVICES:
- (coupon: GW10)
- (coupon: Best7)
VERIFY WRITER PROFILE:
Verify a freelance writer profile:
Check for a suspicious Twitter profile:

SIGN UP for an zurnal24 account!