1
   

Is this statement totally true?

 
 
M56
 
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 02:55 am
AmE does not put "the" in front of initialized broadcasting companies such as ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, BBC, etc.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 847 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 09:57 am
Not sure what AmE is -- American English? If so, that's true -- we say, "Survivor is shown on CBS", not "Survivor is shown on the CBS."

We do say the BBC, though, because that's evidently how you (?) say it. ("I wish we had as much good programming here as can be found on the BBC...")
0 Replies
 
M56
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 12:13 pm
sozobe wrote:
Not sure what AmE is -- American English? If so, that's true -- we say, "Survivor is shown on CBS", not "Survivor is shown on the CBS."

We do say the BBC, though, because that's evidently how you (?) say it. ("I wish we had as much good programming here as can be found on the BBC...")


I have one American English speaker telling me that this type of construction is possible in AE:

"Even BBC puts programmes on ..."
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Mar, 2005 02:12 pm
M56,

It is common to use the preposition the in front of the name of a company in English, but not required.

"programmes" is not an English word, however Razz
0 Replies
 
M56
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 02:12 am
stuh505 wrote:
M56,

It is common to use the preposition the in front of the name of a company in English, but not required.

"programmes" is not an English word, however Razz


Definition
programme (BROADCAST) UK, US program [Show phonetics]
noun [C]
a broadcast on television or radio:
It's one of those arts programmes late at night.
It's my favourite TV programme - I never miss an episode.

(from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 02:31 am
Correct, merriam-webster says (nearly) the same:

Quote:
Main Entry: 1pro·gram Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: prgram, -raam, -grm
Variant(s): or pro·gramme \-gram\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -s

source: Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 08:28 pm
Well I disagree with the dictionary then, because of all the thousands of times I have read that word in English it has been spelled program and never programme...which sounds like it came from another language, I would guess French.
0 Replies
 
Vengoropatubus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Mar, 2005 08:36 pm
Programme is definitely in the german lexicon. Or at least it is as I remember.
0 Replies
 
M56
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Mar, 2005 01:22 am
stuh505 wrote:
Well I disagree with the dictionary then, because of all the thousands of times I have read that word in English it has been spelled program and never programme...which sounds like it came from another language, I would guess French.


<program or programme

Spell this word program when referring to computers or computing, and also in American English. Use programme for other senses such as 'television programme' or 'a programme of events'.>
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Mar, 2005 08:15 am
Since your question was about American English, I'll agree with stuh that it's rarely to never spelled that way here. (America.) I recognized it, but as a British word/ spelling.
0 Replies
 
M56
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Mar, 2005 04:19 am
stuh505 wrote:
Well I disagree with the dictionary then, because of all the thousands of times I have read that word in English it has been spelled program and never programme...which sounds like it came from another language, I would guess French.


"I have compiled a list of several hundred (8 pages double spaced) of Frenchisms in modern American English -- from "au courant" to "voilá !)"

http://www.wordsmith.org/chat/dc.html
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Mar, 2005 09:04 am
My point exactly.

edit: if you use that word, there's no doubt people will understand what you mean. but they'll also know you're a foreigner.
0 Replies
 
flyboy804
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Mar, 2005 09:44 am
Sozobe has hit the primary point. There is no one "correct English" because there is no one "English". There is U.S. English and U.K. English, each with its own "correctness". When we say "English" we are referring to one or the other. Unless we are agreed as to which one we are talking about, there can be no meaningful discussion.
0 Replies
 
M56
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Mar, 2005 02:43 pm
flyboy804 wrote:
Sozobe has hit the primary point. There is no one "correct English" because there is no one "English". There is U.S. English and U.K. English, each with its own "correctness". When we say "English" we are referring to one or the other. Unless we are agreed as to which one we are talking about, there can be no meaningful discussion.


<There is U.S. English and U.K. English, each with its own "correctness". >

There are few more standard variants than those.
0 Replies
 
flyboy804
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Mar, 2005 05:33 pm
That is true of course. I was merely narrowing it down to the two apparently being referenced in this discussion. I certainly wouldn't wish to short change Canada which openly uses a bit of each.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is this statement totally true?
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/18/2025 at 07:48:35