Was US POA audio modified from UK or US print?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 95447

> Geoff wrote:
> I also wonder how much is spent unnecessarily by publishers in 
> switching text from UK English to Ameican English? I have to confess 
> that I find some of it irritating such as the replacement of "s" 
> by "z" - which is very inconsistent linguistically - and the 
> replacement of, say, "-our" by "-or" which doesn't reflect the way
UK English speakers say the word and the problem is that some of these 
> US spellings get over here which can confuse younger children.
> 
> If I am reading an American book, I accept that it will contain US 
> spellings so why isn't there a quid pro quo - Harry staying ever so 
> English while he visits bookshops in the States?

Carol responds:
All I know is that it's part of my job as a copyeditor to Americanize
British spelling and punctuation (except in quotations) even in books
attended for adult readers, just as I have to convert the notes and
references to CMS (Chicago Manual of Style) format--all part of a
desire on the part of the various publishers for consistency (as well
as correctness). It's what editors are paid to do.

But with fiction, especially dialogue, we have a bit of leeway, which
(IMO) is why the American editors changed "fringe," "jumper," etc.,
but left in "prat" and "git." But spellings like "colour" and
"honour," like the use of single quotation marks for dialogue, would
just confuse American children, who have been taught another set of
conventions. Neither set is inherently right or wrong, but tell that
to the teacher who is marking your child's essay or correcting his or
her spelling test.

Carol (who could talk about the reasons why English spelling, British
as well as American, is not phonetic, but won't do so because it's OT)