Was US POA audio modified from UK or US print?

[potioncat]

No: HPFGUIDX 95316

> antoshachekhonte said:
> 
> > On the other hand, it is good to remember that the HP series is 
written
> > for kids, and that
> > Scholastic was trying to make the series as accessible as 
possible to
> > young American
> > readers.


Dina responded: 
> Yes... but I'm *somewhat* bothered at the same time.
> 
> It's like Americans are unable to guess what a word means based on 
the
> context.  It's not like there are numerous instances of UK regional 
speak
> for it to be that confusing.  Look at the various 
spells/incantations as a
> comparison.  Many kids probably aren't familiar with Latin but they 
see
> what the end result is and the meaning translates in their heads.
> 
Potioncat:
But what Scholastic did for the most part was to translate regional 
terms that often didn't have a context, or had a different meaning in 
the U.S.  When I was first introduced to Harry Potter, fairly young 
children were reading it. (4th and 5th grade) Even if they had wanted 
to and had looked up jumper or fringe, they wouldn't have found the 
meaning JKR intended. If fringe was used in context of hiding his 
scar, most kids would realize it was bangs. But if it just referred 
to him flattening his fringe, they might think his robes were 
decorated with fringe.

I would prefer for the books to have a glossary.

Potioncat who wonders how many people would know what they would get 
if they were in a Southern store and asked for a poke?  Or how to 
order a milkshake in New England?