揭祕美式英語中字母U缺失的來龍去脈

When my American editor asked me to research why Brits spell their words with so many extra‘u’s，I immediately knew he had it all wrong。 As a British journalist，it‘s perfectly obvious to me that we have the correct amount of ‘u’s，and that American spelling has lost its vowels along the way。

當我的美國編輯讓我研究一下爲什麼英國人拼寫的單詞多了那麼多“u”時，我立刻意識到，他完全搞錯了。作爲一名英國記者，我認爲我們的拼寫顯然是正確的，是美國人的拼寫在演化過程中逐漸失去了元音字母。

“Color，” “honor，” and “favor” all look quite stubby to me — they‘re positively crying out to be adorned with a few extra ‘u’s。

在我看來，“color”（顏色）、“honor”（榮譽）和“favor”（喜愛）這些單詞的形態都十分短粗，它們迫切需要添加幾個“u”來修飾。

But it turns out that the “o（u）r” suffix has quite a confused history。 The Online Etymology Dictionary reports that -our comes from old French while -or is Latin。 English has used both endings for several centuries。 Indeed，the first three folios of Shakespeare‘s plays reportedly used both spellings equally。

但事實上，“o（u）r”這個後綴的發展脈絡並不清晰。據在線詞源詞典稱，“-our”源自古法語，而“-or”源自拉丁語。英語使用這兩個後綴都已有幾百年歷史。實際上，據說在莎士比亞戲劇集的前3個對開本版本中，這兩種拼寫出現的次數一樣多。

But by the late 18th and early 19th centuries，both the US and the UK started to solidify their preferences，and did so differently。

但在18世紀末至19世紀初，美國和英國都開始強化其語言偏好，並且以不同的方式。

The US took a particularly strong stand thanks to Noah Webster，American lexicographer and co-namesake of the Merriam-Webster dictionaries。 Webster was a language reformer and，as notes，the creator of a dictionary in 1806 that attempted to rectify some of the inconsistencies he observed in English spelling。 He preferred to use the -or suffix and also suggested many other successful changes，such as reversing “re” to create “theater” and “center，” rather than “theatre” and “centre。”

因爲美國詞典編纂者諾厄·韋伯斯特（《梅里厄姆-韋伯斯特詞典》就部分得名於他）的緣故，美國的立場尤其鮮明。 韋伯斯特是一位語言改革家，據《梅里厄姆-韋伯斯特詞典》網站介紹，他曾嘗試在其編纂並於1806年出版的詞典中修正他所看到的英語拼寫不一致。韋伯斯特 更喜歡使用“-or”這個後綴，他還提出了許多其他的成功建議，例如將“re”改爲“er”，由此將“theatre”（劇院）和“centre”（中 心）變爲“theater”和“center”。

However，other Webster proposals，such as changing “tongue” to “tung，” “women” to “wimmen，” “island” to “iland，” and “thumb” to “thum” were ultimately rejected。

但韋伯斯特的另一些建議最終沒有被採納，例如將“tongue”（舌頭）改爲“tung”，將“women”（女性）改爲“wimmen”，將“island”（島嶼）改爲“iland”，將“thumb”（拇指）改爲“thum”。

Meanwhile in the UK， Samuel Johnson wrote A Dictionary of the English Language in 1755。 Johnson was far more of a spelling purist than Webster，and decided that in cases where the origin of the word was unclear，it was more likely to have a French than Latin root。“We have few Latin words，among the terms of domestick use，which are not French，”wrote Johnson。 And so he preferred -our to -or。

與此同時，在英國，1755年塞繆爾·約翰遜編纂了 《英語詞典》。在追求拼寫的純正性方面，約翰遜的要求遠高於韋伯斯特。他認爲，在詞源不明的情況下，源於法語比源於拉丁語的可能性更大。約翰遜寫道：“就 國內使用的詞彙來說，源自拉丁語而不是法語的詞彙極少。”所以，他更喜歡使用“-our”。

“I have endeavoured to proceed with a scholar‘s reverence for antiquity，and a grammarian’s regard to the genius of our tongue，”he wrote。 As such，he “attempted few alterations。”

他寫道：“我努力以學者對古文字的敬畏和語法學家對我們語言特徵的尊重來進行這項工作。”因此，他“極少嘗試改變”。

So while the UK chose to preserve linguistic roots，the US opted to modernize spelling。 And if you‘re wondering which country got it right，the answer is，well，neither。 Language is constantly evolving，and the US and UK simply went their different linguistic ways。

所以，英國選擇保留語言的來源，而美國選擇對拼寫進行現代化改造。如果你想知道哪個國家做得對，答案是，沒有對錯之分。語言在不斷演變，美國和英國只是選擇了不同的語言道路。