Comments on: Among/Amongst: Is there a Difference?

By: John M

John M — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 01:36:25 +0000

I agree with the posters that state that the differences between BE and AE is highly exaggerated. The worst offenders seem to be the ones with their own agenda. To say that Americans “simplified” the spelling is a a gross exaggeration. Most, if not all American spelling conventions existed on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean during Noah Webster’s time. At the time the British simply have a better affinity for all things French which is today reflected in the spelling of many words. (big deal)
The same thing goes for words such as “autumn” and “fall”. Americans did not invent the word “fall” (which is a much older word in the language than the Latin based “autumn) For whatever reason Americans simply have more of an affinity for saying “fall” but there is nothing at all unusual about saying “autumn” in the US.
Brits might be annoyed by what they consider to be “silly” Americanisms, yet Americans are often equally annoyed by equally silly “Briticism” Take for example ” the words “nappy” “dummy” and “full stop”. To an American these and many similar words sound like childish neologisms for “diaper” “pacifier” and “period”., We also think it’s silly that the British laugh at the word “pants” as it is a cognate in many other languages such as French, Spanish and Italian. And by the way, Americans also DO periodically use the word “trousers”. (I know my grandparents did)
The point I am trying to make is that it’s true the the differences between AE and BE are often highly exaggerated and nowhere nearly as significant as many many native and non-native speakers make them out to be.

By: Wilson

Wilson — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:44:03 +0000

Among, amongst, the two words has no difference, any one that comes first, but i prefere to use “amongst” it sounds sweateable.

By: 10thMan

10thMan — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:24:13 +0000

Let me just clear this up, once and for all.

Technically, among and amongst are interchangeable; using one over because of correctness is ridiculous. However, the natural usage of these word– the way we would use them without thinking about it– is slightly different.

When there are three or more of something being discussed, its easy. If you’re talking about the relations between the individual constituents of the group, use amongst (EX. Katie, Ashley, and Rachel must divide the work up amongst themselves.). If you are using it to mean within the group, use among (EX. Her arrival caused a stir among the people).

Amongst is generally used in active, rather than passive sentences (in which you would use among.)

By: Sylvia

Sylvia — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:58:45 +0000

Andy said:
> Words look more elegant in British English.

cf.:

BE: colour, honour, neighbour, labour
AE: color, honor, neighbor, labor
BE & AE: contour, velour, paramour, troubadour, glamour

BE: theatre, litre, lustre, mitre, spectre, centre, calibre, fibre
AE: theater, liter, luster, miter, specter, center, caliber, fiber
BE & AE: acre, lucre, massacre, mediocre

BE: organise(ize), recognise(ize), realise(ize); ratio of ise:ize=3:2
AE: organize, recognize, realize

BE: analogue, catalogue, dialogue
AE: analog(ue), catalog(ue), dialog(ue); -og endings growing

Which ones do you pick? For example, I think the -ize endings fit better than the -ise ones, and most of the “re” endings are better off as “er”. But “our” is usually better than “or”. I used to hate “catalog” but now it seems a lot more acceptable.

“Among” vs. “Amongst”? Hands down, “among” would be my pick although I use both of them.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:32:28 +0000

I’m an American who thinks the English language should have one unified spelling and it should be the British way. Words look more elegant in British English.